There weren’t too many highlights in the 2024 budget as far as I was concerned. Overall, it was a bread and butter budget concerned with housing, jobs, business, and prices along with the government’s perennial focus on climate change and the future for young people and Indigenous peoples. There was nothing particularly special about the funds allocated for research and, as for defence spending in the 2024 budget, that was and is nominally interesting.
“Boosting Research, Innovation, and Productivity” was found in Chapter Four: Economic Growth for Every Generation.
4.1 Boosting Research, Innovation, and Productivity
For anyone who’s not familiar with ‘innovation’ as a buzzword, it’s code for ‘business’. From 4.1 of the budget,
Key Ongoing Actions
Supporting scientific discovery, developing Canadian research talent, and attracting top researchers from around the planet to make Canada their home base for their important work with more than $16 billion committed since 2016.
Supporting critical emerging sectors, through initiatives like the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy, [emphases mine] the National Quantum Strategy, the Pan-Canadian Genomics Strategy, and the Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy.
Nearly $2 billion to fuel Canada’s Global Innovation Clusters to grow these innovation ecosystems, promote commercialization, support intellectual property creation and retention, and scale Canadian businesses.
Investing $3.5 billion in the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership to strengthen the innovation, competitiveness, and resiliency of the agriculture and agri-food sector.
Flowing up to $333 million over the next decade to support dairy sector investments in research, product and market development, and processing capacity for solids non-fat, thus increasing its competitiveness and productivity.
The only ’emerging’ sector singled out for new funding was the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy and that is almost all ‘innovation’, from 4.1 of the budget,
Strengthening Canada’s AI Advantage
Canada’s artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem is among the best in the world. Since 2017, the government has invested over $2 billion towards AI in Canada. Fuelled by those investments, Canada is globally recognized for strong AI talent, research, and its AI sector.
Today, Canada’s AI sector is ranked first in the world for growth of women in AI, and first in the G7 for year-over-year growth of AI talent. Every year since 2019, Canada has published the most AI-related papers, per capita, in the G7. Our AI firms are filing patents at three times the average rate in the G7, and they are attracting nearly a third of all venture capital in Canada. In 2022-23, there were over 140,000 actively engaged AI professionals in Canada, an increase of 29 per cent compared to the previous year. These are just a few of Canada’s competitive advantages in AI and we are aiming even higher.
To secure Canada’s AI advantage, the government has already:
Established the first national AI strategy in the world through the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy;
Supported access to advanced computing capacity, including through the recent signing of a letter of intent with NVIDIA and a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.K. government; and,
Scaled-up Canadian AI firms through the Strategic Innovation Fund and Global Innovation Clusters program.
Figure 4.1 Building on Canada’s AI Advantage
AI is a transformative economic opportunity for Canada and the government is committed to doing more to support our world-class research community, launch Canadian AI businesses, and help them scale-up to meet the demands of the global economy. The processing capacity required by AI is accelerating a global push for the latest technology, for the latest computing infrastructure.
Currently, most compute capacity is located in other countries. Challenges accessing compute power slows down AI research and innovation, and also exposes Canadian firms to a reliance on privately-owned computing, outside of Canada. This comes with dependencies and security risks. And, it is a barrier holding back our AI firms and researchers.
We need to break those barriers to stay competitive in the global AI race and ensure workers benefit from the higher wages of AI transformations; we must secure Canada’s AI advantage. We also need to ensure workers who fear their jobs may be negatively impacted by AI have the tools and skills training needed in a changing economy.
To secure Canada’s AI advantage Budget 2024 announces a monumental increase in targeted AI support of $2.4 billion, including:
$2 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, to launch a new AI Compute Access Fund and Canadian AI Sovereign Compute Strategy, to help Canadian researchers, start-ups, and scale-up businesses access the computational power they need to compete and help catalyze the development of Canadian-owned and located AI infrastructure.
$200 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to boost AI start-ups to bring new technologies to market, and accelerate AI adoption in critical sectors, such as agriculture, clean technology, health care, and manufacturing. This support will be delivered through Canada’s Regional Development Agencies.
$100 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, for the National Research Council’s AI Assist Program to help Canadian small- and medium-sized businesses and innovators build and deploy new AI solutions, potentially in coordination with major firms, to increase productivity across the country.
$50 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, to support workers who may be impacted by AI, such as creative industries. This support will be delivered through the Sectoral Workforce Solutions Program, which will provide new skills training for workers in potentially disrupted sectors and communities.
The government will engage with industry partners and research institutes to swiftly implement AI investment initiatives, fostering collaboration and innovation across sectors for accelerated technological advancement.
Before moving to the part of budget that focuses on safe and responsible use of AI, I’ve got some information about the legislative situation and an omnibus bill C-27 which covers AI, from my October 10, 2024 posting,
You can find more up-to-date information about the status of the Committee’s Bill-27 meetings on this webpage where it appears that September 26, 2024 was the committee’s most recent meeting. If you click on the highlighted meeting dates, you will be given the option of watching a webcast of the meeting. The webpage will also give you access to a list of witnesses, the briefs and the briefs themselves.
November 2024 update: The committee’s most recent meeting is still listed as September 26, 2024.
AI has tremendous economic potential, but as with all technology, it presents important considerations to ensure its safe development and implementation. Canada is a global leader in responsible AI and is supporting an AI ecosystem that promotes responsible use of technology. From development through to implementation and beyond, the government is taking action to protect Canadians from the potentially harmful impacts of AI.
The government is committed to guiding AI innovation in a positive direction, and to encouraging the responsible adoption of AI technologies by Canadians and Canadian businesses. To bolster efforts to ensure the responsible use of AI:
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $50 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to create an AI Safety Institute of Canada to ensure the safe development and deployment of AI. The AI Safety Institute will help Canada better understand and protect against the risks of advanced and generative AI systems. The government will engage with stakeholders and international partners with competitive AI policies to inform the final design and stand-up of the AI Safety Institute.
Budget 2024 also proposes to provide $5.1 million in 2025-26 to equip the AI and Data Commissioner Office with the necessary resources to begin enforcing the proposed Artificial Intelligence and Data Act.
Budget 2024 proposes $3.5 million over two years, starting in 2024-25, to advance Canada’s leadership role with the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence, securing Canada’s leadership on the global stage when it comes to advancing the responsible development, governance, and use of AI technologies internationally.
Using AI to Keep Canadians Safe
AI has shown incredible potential to toughen up security systems, including screening protocols for air cargo. Since 2012, Transport Canada has been testing innovative approaches to ensure that air cargo coming into Canada is safe, protecting against terrorist attacks. This included launching a pilot project to screen 10 to 15 per cent of air cargo bound for Canada and developing an artificial intelligence system for air cargo screening.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $6.7 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to Transport Canada to establish the Pre-Load Air Cargo Targeting Program to screen 100 per cent of air cargo bound for Canada. This program, powered by cutting-edge artificial intelligence, will increase security and efficiency, and align Canada’s air security regime with those of its international partners.
There was a small section which updates some information about intellectual property retention (patent box retention) but otherwise is concerned with industrial R&B (a perennial Canadian weakness), from 4.1 of the budget,
Boosting R&D and Intellectual Property Retention
Research and development (R&D) is a key driver of productivity and growth. Made-in-Canada innovations meaningfully increase our gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, create good-paying jobs, and secure Canada’s position as a world-leading advanced economy.
To modernize and improve the Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax incentives, the federal government launched consultations on January 31, 2024, to explore cost-neutral ways to enhance the program to better support innovative businesses and drive economic growth. In these consultations, which closed on April 15, 2024, the government asked Canadian researchers and innovators for ways to better deliver SR&ED support to small- and medium-sized Canadian businesses and enable the next generation of innovators to scale-up, create jobs, and grow the economy.
Budget 2024 announces the government is launching a second phase of consultations on more specific policy parameters, to hear further views from businesses and industry on specific and technical reforms. This includes exploring how Canadian public companies could be made eligible for the enhanced credit. Further details on the consultation process will be released shortly on the Department of Finance Canada website.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $600 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, with $150 million per year ongoing for future enhancements to the SR&ED program. The second phase of consultations will inform how this funding could be targeted to boost research and innovation.
On January 31, 2024, the government also launched consultations on creating a patent box regime to encourage the development and retention of intellectual property in Canada. The patent box consultation closed on April 15, 2024. Submissions received through this process, which are still under review, will help inform future government decisions with respect to a patent box regime.
Nice to get an update on what’s happening with the patent box regime.
The Tri-Council consisting of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) don’t often get mentioned in the federal budget but they did this year, from 4.1 of the budget,
Enhancing Research Support
Since 2016, the federal government has committed more than $16 billion in research, including funding for the federal granting councils—the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).
This research support enables groundbreaking discoveries in areas such as climate change, health emergencies, artificial intelligence, and psychological health. This plays a critical role in solving the world’s greatest challenges, those that will have impacts for generations.
Canada’s granting councils already do excellent work within their areas of expertise, but more needs to be done to maximize their effect. The improvements we are making today, following extensive consultations including with the Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System, will strengthen and modernize Canada’s federal research support.
To increase core research grant funding and support Canadian researchers, Budget 2024 proposes to provide $1.8 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $748.3 million per year ongoing to SSHRC, NSERC, and CIHR.
To provide better coordination across the federally funded research ecosystem, Budget 2024 announces the government will create a new capstone research funding organization. The granting councils will continue to exist within this new organization, and continue supporting excellence in investigator-driven research, including linkages with the Health portfolio. This new organization and structure will also help to advance internationally collaborative, multi-disciplinary, and mission-driven research. The government is delivering on the Advisory Panel’s observation that more coordination is needed to maximize the impact of federal research support across Canada’s research ecosystem.
To help guide research priorities moving forward, Budget 2024 also announces the government will create an advisory Council on Science and Innovation. This Council will be made up of leaders from the academic, industry, and not-for-profit sectors, and be responsible for a national science and innovation strategy to guide priority setting and increase the impact of these significant federal investments.
Budget 2024 also proposes to provide a further $26.9 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $26.6 million in remaining amortization and $6.6 million ongoing, to the granting councils to establish an improved and harmonized grant management system.
The government will also work with other key players in the research funding system—the provinces, territories, and Canadian industry—to ensure stronger alignment, and greater co-funding to address important challenges, notably Canada’s relatively low level of business R&D investment.
More details on these important modernization efforts will be announced in the 2024 Fall Economic Statement.
World-Leading Research Infrastructure
Modern, high-quality research facilities and infrastructure are essential for breakthroughs in Canadian research and science. These laboratories and research centres are where medical and other scientific breakthroughs are born, helping to solve real-world problems and create the economic opportunities of the future. World-leading research facilities will attract and train the next generation of scientific talent. That’s why, since 2015, the federal government has made unprecedented investments in science and technology, at an average of $13.6 billion per year, compared to the average from 2009-10 to 2015-16 of just $10.8 billion per year. But we can’t stop here.
To advance the next generation of cutting-edge research, Budget 2024 proposes major research and science infrastructure investments, including:
$399.8 million over five years, starting in 2025-26, to support TRIUMF, Canada’s sub-atomic physics research laboratory, located on the University of British Columbia’s Vancouver campus. This investment will upgrade infrastructure at the world’s largest cyclotron particle accelerator, positioning TRIUMF, and the partnering Canadian research universities, at the forefront of physics research and enabling new medical breakthroughs and treatments, from drug development to cancer therapy.
$176 million over five years, starting in 2025‑26, to CANARIE, a national not-for-profit organization that manages Canada’s ultra high-speed network to connect researchers, educators, and innovators, including through eduroam. With network speeds hundreds of times faster, and more secure, than conventional home and office networks, this investment will ensure this critical infrastructure can connect researchers across Canada’s world-leading post-secondary institutions.
$83.5 million over three years, starting in 2026-27 to extend support to Canadian Light Source in Saskatoon. Funding will continue the important work at the only facility of its kind in Canada. A synchrotron light source allows scientists and researchers to examine the microscopic nature of matter. This specialized infrastructure contributes to breakthroughs in areas ranging from climate-resistant crop development to green mining processes.
$45.5 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to support the Arthur B. McDonald Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute, a network of universities and institutes that coordinate astroparticle physics expertise. Headquartered at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, the institute builds on the legacy of Dr. McDonald’s 2015 Nobel Prize for his work on neutrino physics. These expert engineers, technicians, and scientists design, construct, and operate the experiments conducted in Canada’s underground and underwater research infrastructure, where research into dark matter and other mysterious particles thrives. This supports innovation in areas like clean technology and medical imaging, and educates and inspires the next wave of Canadian talent.
$30 million over three years, starting in 2024-25, to support the completion of the University of Saskatchewan’s Centre for Pandemic Research at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization in Saskatoon. This investment will enable the study of high-risk pathogens to support vaccine and therapeutic development, a key pillar in Canada’s Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy. Of this amount, $3 million would be sourced from the existing resources of Prairies Economic Development Canada.
These new investments build on existing federal research support:
The Strategic Science Fund, which announced the results of its first competition in December 2023, providing support to 24 third-party science and research organizations starting in 2024-25;
Canada recently concluded negotiations to be an associate member of Horizon Europe, which would enable Canadians to access a broader range of research opportunities under the European program starting this year; and,
The steady increase in federal funding for extramural and intramural science and technology by the government which was 44 per cent higher in 2023 relative to 2015.
…
Advancing Space Research and Exploration
Canada is a leader in cutting-edge innovation and technologies for space research and exploration. Our astronauts make great contributions to international space exploration missions. The government is investing in Canada’s space research and exploration activities.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $8.6 million in 2024-25 to the Canadian Space Agency for the Lunar Exploration Accelerator Program to support Canada’s world-class space industry and help accelerate the development of new technologies. This initiative empowers Canada to leverage space to solve everyday challenges, such as enhancing remote health care services and improving access to healthy food in remote communities, while also supporting Canada’s human space flight program.
Budget 2024 announces the establishment of a new whole-of-government approach to space exploration, technology development, and research. The new National Space Council will enable the level of collaboration required to secure Canada’s future as a leader in the global space race, addressing cross-cutting issues that span commercial, civil, and defence domains. This will also enable the government to leverage Canada’s space industrial base with its world-class capabilities, workforce, and track record of innovation and delivery.
I found two responses to the budget from two science organizations and the responses fall into the moderately pleased category. Here’s an April 17, 2024 news release from Evidence for Democracy (E4D), Note: Links have been removed,
As a leading advocate for evidence-informed decision-making and the advancement of science policy in Canada, Evidence for Democracy (E4D) welcomes the budget’s emphasis on scientific research and innovation. Since its inception, E4D has been at the forefront of advocating for policies that support robust scientific research and its integration into public policy. To support this work, we have compiled a budget analysis for the science and research sector here for more context on Budget 2024.
“Budget 2024 provides an encouraging investment into next generation researchers and research support systems,” says Sarah Laframboise, Executive Director of E4D, “By prioritizing investments in research talent, infrastructure, and innovation, the government is laying the foundation for a future driven by science and evidence.”
The budget’s initiatives to enhance graduate student scholarships and postdoctoral fellowships reflect a commitment to nurturing Canada’s research talent, a cornerstone of E4D’s advocacy efforts through its role on the Coalition for Canadian Research. E4D is encouraged by this investment in next generation researchers and core research grants, who form the bedrock of scientific discovery and drive innovation across sectors. Additionally, the formation of a new capstone research funding organization and Advisory Council on Science and Innovation are signs of a strategic vision that values Canadian science and research.
While Budget 2024 represents a significant step forward for science and research in Canada, E4D recognizes that challenges and opportunities lie ahead.
“We note that funding for research in Budget 2024 is heavily back-loaded, with larger funding values coming into effect in a few years time,” adds Laframboise, “Given that this also includes significant structural and policy changes, this leaves some concern over the execution and roll-out of these investments in practice.”
As the details of the budget initiatives unfold, E4D remains committed to monitoring developments, advocating for evidence-based policies, and engaging with stakeholders to ensure that science continues to thrive as a driver of progress and prosperity in Canada.
The April 16, 2024 E4D budget analysis by Farah Qaiser, Nada Salem, Sarah Laframboise, Simarpreet Singh is here. The authors provide more detail than I do.
The second response to the 2024 budget is from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) is posted on a federal government website, from an April 29, 2024 letter, Note: Links have been removed,
Dear colleagues,
On April 16, 2024, the Government of Canada released Budget 2024 – Fairness for Every Generation – a Budget that proposes a historic level of investment in research and innovation. Most notably for CIHR, NSERC, and SSHRC, this included $1.8 billion in core research grant funding over five years (starting in 2024-25, with $748.3 million per year ongoing). This proposed investment recognizes the vital role played by research in improving the lives of Canadians. We are thrilled by the news of this funding and will share more details about how and when these funds will be distributed as the Budget process unfolds.
Budget 2024 also proposes $825 million over five years (starting in 2024-25, with $199.8 million per year ongoing) to increase the annual value of master’s and doctoral student scholarships to $27,000 and $40,000, respectively, and post-doctoral fellowships to $70,000. This will also increase the number of research scholarships and fellowships provided, building to approximately 1,720 more graduate students or fellows benefiting each year. To make it easier for students and fellows to access support, the enhanced suite of scholarships and fellowship programs will be streamlined into one talent program. These proposals are the direct result of a coordinated effort to recognize the importance of students in the research ecosystem.
The Budget proposes other significant investments in health research, including providing:
a further $26.9 million over five years (starting in 2024-25, with $26.6 million in remaining amortization and $6.6 million ongoing) to the granting councils to establish an improved and harmonized grant management system.
$10 million in 2024-2025 for CIHR to support an endowment to increase prize values awarded by the Gairdner Foundation for excellence in health research.
$80 million over five years for Health Canada to support the Brain Canada Foundation in its advancement of brain research.
$30 million over three years (starting in 2024-25) to support Indigenous participation in research, with $10 million each for First Nation, Métis, and Inuit partners.
$2 billion over five years (starting in 2024-25) to launch a new AI Compute Access Fund and Canadian AI Sovereign Compute Strategy, to help Canadian researchers, start-ups, and scale-up businesses access the computational power they need to compete and help catalyze the development of Canadian-owned and located AI infrastructure.
As well, to help guide research priorities moving forward, Budget 2024 announces that the government will create an Advisory Council on Science and Innovation. This Council will be comprised of leaders from the academic, industry, and not-for-profit sectors, and will be responsible for a national science and innovation strategy to guide priority setting and increase the impact of these significant federal investments.
In addition to these historic investments, Budget 2024 includes a proposal to create a “new capstone research funding organization” that will provide improved coordination across the federally funded research ecosystem. This proposal stems directly from the recommendations of the Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System, and recognizes the need for more strategic coordination in the federal research system. The Budget notes that the granting councils will each continue to exist within this new organization, and continue supporting excellence in investigator-driven research, including linkages with the Health portfolio. While the governance implications of this new organization are not known at this time, the CIHR Institutes will remain in place as an integral part of CIHR. As stated in the Budget, the timing and details with respect to the creation of this organization still need to be determined, but it did indicate that more details will be announced in the 2024 Fall Economic Statement.
As well, CIHR will be working closely with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Health Canada, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada in the coming months to implement various Budget measures related to research. In the meantime, CIHR will continue its business as usual.
These announcements and investments are significant and unprecedented and will create exciting opportunities for the Tri-Agencies and other partners across the federal research ecosystem to contribute to the health, social, and economic needs and priorities of Canadians. They will also ensure that Canada remains a world leader in science. This is positive and welcome news for the CIHR community. We look forward to embarking on this new journey with Canada’s health research community.
Tammy Clifford, PhD Acting President, CIHR
Defence
I have taken to including information about the funding for the military on the grounds that the military has historically been the source of much science, medical, and technology innovation. (Television anyone?)
As the world becomes increasingly unstable, as climate change increases the severity and frequency of natural disasters, and as the risk of conflict grows, Canada is asking more of our military. Whether it is deploying to Latvia as part of Operation REASSURANCE, or Nova Scotia as part of Operation LENTUS, those who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces have answered the call whenever they are needed, to keep Canadians safe.
On April 8 [2024], in response to the rapidly changing security environment, the government announced an update to its defence policy: Our North, Strong and Free. In this updated policy, the government laid out its vision for Canada’s national defence, which will ensure the safety of Canadians, our allies, and our partners by equipping our soldiers with the cutting-edge tools and advanced capabilities they need to keep Canadians safe in a changing world.
Budget 2024 proposes foundational investments of $8.1 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, and $73.0 billion over 20 years to the Department of National Defence (DND), the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), and Global Affairs Canada (GAC) to ensure Canada is ready to respond to global threats and to protect the well-being of Canadian Armed Forces members. Canada’s defence spending-to-GDP ratio is expected to reach 1.76 per cent by 2029-30. These include:
$549.4 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, with $267.8 billion in future years, for DND to replace Canada’s worldwide satellite communications equipment; for new tactical helicopters, long-range missile capabilities for the Army, and airborne early warning aircraft; and for other investments to defend Canada’s sovereignty;
$1.9 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $8.2 billion in future years, for DND to extend the useful life of the Halifax-class frigates and extend the service contract of the auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel, while Canada awaits delivery of next generation naval vessels;
$1.4 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $8.2 billion in future years, for DND to replenish its supplies of military equipment;
$1.8 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $7.7 billion in future years, for DND to build a strategic reserve of ammunition and scale up the production of made-in-Canada artillery ammunition. Private sector beneficiaries are expected to contribute to infrastructure and retooling costs;
$941.9 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, with $16.2 billion in future years, for DND to ensure that military infrastructure can support modern equipment and operations;
$917.4 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $10.9 billion in future years and $145.8 million per year ongoing, for CSE and GAC to enhance their intelligence and cyber operations programs to protect Canada’s economic security and respond to evolving national security threats;
$281.3 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $216 million in future years, for DND for a new electronic health record platform for military health care;
$6.9 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, with $1.4 billion in future years, for DND to build up to 1,400 new homes and renovate an additional 2,500 existing units for Canadian Armed Forces personnel on bases across Canada (see Chapter 1);
$100 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to DND for child care services for Canadian Armed Forces personnel and their families (see Chapter 2);
$149.9 million over four years, starting in 2025-26, with $1.8 billion in future years, for DND to increase the number of civilian specialists in priority areas; and,
$52.5 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $54.8 million in future years, to DND to support start-up firms developing dual-use technologies critical to our defence via the NATO Innovation Fund.
To support Our North, Strong and Free, $156.7 million over three years, starting in 2026-27, and $537.7 million in future years would be allocated from funding previously committed to Canada’s 2017 Defence Policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged.
Budget 2024 also proposes additional measures to strengthen Canada’s national defence:
$1.2 billion over 20 years, starting in 2024-25, to support the ongoing procurement of critical capabilities, military equipment, and infrastructure through DND’s Capital Investment Fund; and,
$66.5 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $7.4 billion in future years to DND for the Future Aircrew Training program to develop the next generation of Royal Canadian Air Force personnel. Of this amount, $66.5 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, would be sourced from existing DND resources.
Budget 2024 also announces reforms to Canadian defence policy and its review processes:
Committing Canada to undertake a Defence Policy Review every four years, as part of a cohesive review of the National Security Strategy; and,
Undertaking a review of Canada’s defence procurement system.
With this proposed funding, since 2022, the government has committed more than $125 billion over 20 years in incremental funding to strengthen national defence and help keep Canadians and our democracy safe in an increasingly unpredictable world—today and for generations. Since 2015, this adds up to over $175 billion in incremental funding for national defence.
Enhancing CSIS Intelligence Capabilities
As an advanced economy and an open and free democracy, Canada continues to be targeted by hostile actors, which threaten our democratic institutions, diaspora communities, and economic prosperity. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) protects Canadians from threats, such as violent extremism and foreign interference, through its intelligence operations in Canada and around the world.
To equip CSIS to combat emerging global threats and keep pace with technological developments, further investments in intelligence capabilities and infrastructure are needed. These will ensure CSIS can continue to protect Canadians.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $655.7 million over eight years, starting in 2024-25, with $191.1 million in remaining amortization, and $114.7 million ongoing to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to enhance its intelligence capabilities, and its presence in Toronto.
Maintaining a Robust Arctic Presence
The Canadian Arctic is warming four times faster than the world average, as a result of climate change. It is also where we share a border with today’s most hostile nuclear power—Russia. The shared imperatives of researching climate change where its impacts are most severe, and maintaining an ongoing presence in the Arctic enable Canada to advance this important scientific work and assert our sovereignty.
Maintaining a robust research presence supports Canada’s Arctic sovereignty. Scientific and research operations in the Arctic advance our understanding of how climate change is affecting people, the economy, and the environment in the region. This is an important competitive advantage, as economic competition increases in the region.
To support research operations in Canada’s North, Budget 2024 proposes:
$46.9 million over five years starting in 2024-25, with $8.5 million in remaining amortization and $11.1 million ongoing, to Natural Resources Canada to renew the Polar Continental Shelf Program to continue supporting northern research logistics, such as lodging and flights for scientists; and,
$3.5 million in 2024-25 to Polar Knowledge Canada to support its activities, including the operation of the Canadian High Arctic Research Station.
…
Protecting Canadians from Financial Crimes
Financial crimes are serious threats to public safety, national security, and Canada’s financial system. They can range from terrorist financing, corruption, and the evasion of sanctions, to money laundering, fraud, and tax evasion. These crimes have real world implications, often enabling other criminal behaviour. Financial crime also undermines the fairness and transparency that are so essential to our economy.
Since 2017, the government has undertaken significant work to crack down on financial crime:
Investing close to $320 million since 2019 to strengthen compliance, financial intelligence, information sharing, and investigative capacity to support money laundering investigations;
Creating new Integrated Money Laundering Investigative Teams in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec, which convene experts to advance investigations into money laundering, supported by dedicated forensic accounting experts;
Launching a publicly accessible beneficial ownership registry for federal corporations on January 22, 2024. The government continues to call upon provinces and territories to advance a pan-Canadian approach to beneficial ownership transparency;
Modernizing Canada’s anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing framework to adapt to emerging technologies; vulnerable sectors; and growing risks such as sanctions evasion; and,
Establishing public-private partnerships with the financial sector, that are improving the detection and disruption of profit-oriented crimes, including human trafficking, online child sexual exploitation, and fentanyl trafficking.
Budget 2024 takes further action to protect Canadians from financial crimes.
Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorist Financing
Criminal and terrorist organizations continually look for new ways to perpetrate illicit activities. Canada needs a robust legal framework that keeps pace with evolving financial crimes threats.
To combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and sanctions evasion, Budget 2024 announces:
The government intends to introduce legislative amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA), the Criminal Code the Income Tax Act, and the Excise Tax Act.
Proposed amendments to the PCMLTFA would:
Enhance the ability of reporting entities under the PCMLTFA to share information with each other to detect and deter money laundering, terrorist financing, and sanctions evasion, while maintaining privacy protections for personal information, including an oversight role for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner under regulations;
Permit the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) to disclose financial intelligence to provincial and territorial civil forfeiture offices to support efforts to seize property linked to unlawful activity; and, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada to strengthen the integrity of Canada’s citizenship process;
Enable anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing regulatory obligations to cover factoring companies, cheque cashing businesses, and leasing and finance companies to close a loophole and level the playing field across businesses providing financial services;
Allow FINTRAC to publicize more information around violations of obligations under the PCMLTFA when issuing administrative monetary penalties to strengthen transparency and compliance; and,
Make technical amendments to close loopholes and correct inconsistencies.
Proposed amendments to the Criminal Code would:
Allow courts to issue an order to require a financial institution to keep an account open to assist in the investigation of a suspected criminal offence; and,
Allow courts to issue a repeating production order to authorize law enforcement to obtain ongoing, specified information on activity in an account or multiple accounts connected to a person of interest in a criminal investigation.
Proposed amendments to the Income Tax Act and Excise Tax Act would:
Ensure Canada Revenue Agency officials who carry out criminal investigations are authorized to seek general warrants through court applications, thereby modernizing and simplifying evidence gathering processes and helping to fight tax evasion and other financial crimes.
Canada Financial Crimes Agency
As announced in Budget 2023, the Canada Financial Crimes Agency (CFCA) will become Canada’s lead enforcement agency against financial crime. It will bring together expertise necessary to increase money laundering charges, prosecutions, and convictions, and the seizure of criminal assets.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $1.7 million over two years, starting in 2024-25, to the Department of Finance to finalize the design and legal framework for the CFCA.
Fighting Trade-Based Fraud and Money Laundering
Trade-based financial crime is one of the most pervasive means of laundering money; it’s estimated that this is how hundreds of millions of dollars are laundered each year. To strengthen efforts to fight trade fraud and money laundering, the 2023Fall Economic Statement announced enhancements to the Canada Border Services Agency’s authorities under the PCMLTFA to combat trade-based financial crime and the intent to create a Trade Transparency Unit.
Budget 2024 builds on this work by proposing to provide $29.9 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, with $5.1 million in remaining amortization and $4.2 million ongoing, for the Canada Border Services Agency to support the implementation of its new authorities under the PCMLTFA to combat financial crime and strengthen efforts to combat international financial crime with our allies.
Supporting Veterans’ Well-Being
After their service and their sacrifice, veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces deserve our full support. Veterans’ organizations are often best placed to understand the needs of veterans and to develop programming that improves their quality of life. In 2018, the federal government launched the Veteran and Family Well-Being Fund, which provides funding to public, private, and academic organizations, to advance research projects and innovative approaches to deliver services to veterans and their families.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide an additional $6 million over three years, starting in 2024-25, to Veterans Affairs Canada for the Veteran and Family Well-Being Fund. A portion of the funding will focus on projects for Indigenous, women, and 2SLGBTQI+ veterans.
Telemedicine Services for Veterans and Their Families
After serving in the Canadian Armed Forces, many veterans who previously received their health care from the Forces need to find a family doctor in the provincial system, which makes their transition to civilian life more stressful, especially if they need health care for service-related injuries.
To ensure veterans and their families have access to the care they deserve after their service to Canada:
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $9.3 million over five years, starting in 2024-25, to Veterans Affairs Canada to extend and expand the Veteran Family Telemedicine Service pilot for another three years. This initiative will provide up to two years of telemedicine services to recent veterans and their families.
The system of rules and institutions that were established in the wake of the Second World War unleashed an era of prosperity unprecedented in human history. This era generated a massive expansion of global trade, and lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. As a trading nation with privileged access to more than two-thirds of the global economy, Canada has benefitted enormously from the stability and certainty that this system provided.
Supply chain disruptions and rising protectionism threaten this Canadian advantage that has been enjoyed for generations. Canada is taking action to make sure we preserve the rules-based international order. We are strengthening our trade relationships and making sure they reflect our values. We are ensuring our economy is resilient and secure, protecting Canadians and Canada from economic pressure from authoritarian regimes, and defending Canada’s economic interests.
Budget 2024 makes investments to ensure the opportunities and prosperity of trade, enjoyed by generations of Canadians, continue to be there for every generation.
Key Ongoing Actions
Launching in 2017 Strong, Secure, Engaged, to maintain the Canadian Armed Forces as an agile, multi-purpose, combat-ready force, ensuring Canada is strong domestically, an active partner in North America, and engaged internationally.
Upholding Canada’s 15 free trade agreements with 51 countries. Canada is the only G7 country with comprehensive trade and investment agreements with all other G7 members.
Implementing the modernized Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement and the United Kingdom’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Establishing a new Canada-Taiwan foreign investment promotion and protection arrangement in December 2023.
Launching Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy in November 2022, committing almost $2.3 billion to strengthen Canada’s role as a strong partner in the region. The strategy included:
$492.9 million over five years to reinforce Canada’s Indo-Pacific naval presence and increase Canadian Armed Forces participation in regional military exercises.
$227.8 million over five years to increase Canada’s work with partners in the region on national security, cyber security, and responses to crime, terrorism, and threats from weapons proliferation.
Canada is negotiating free trade agreements with Indonesia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to provide additional trade and investment opportunities in the Indo-Pacific region.
To further reinforce Canada’s role as a trusted supply chain partner, and its commitment to cooperate with like-minded partners in meeting emerging global challenges, including the economic resilience of the world’s democracies, Canada undertook the following actions:
Joined with the U.S. in the Energy Transformation Task Force to accelerate cooperation on critical clean energy opportunities and to strengthen integrated Canada-U.S. supply chains, which as announced in Chapter 4, has been extended for another year.
Canada signed a new agreement in May 2023 with South Korea for cooperation on critical mineral supply chains, clean energy transition, and energy security.
Canada endorsed the Joint Declaration Against Trade-Related Economic Coercion and Non-Market Policies and Practices with Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the U.K., and the U.S. in June 2023.
Protecting Canadian Businesses from Unfair Foreign Competition
Canadian companies and workers are able to do business around the world, selling their goods and expertise, because the government has delivered free trade agreements that cover 61 per cent of the world’s GDP and 1.5 billion consumers. This means Canadians can do business in Japan and Malaysia with the CPTPP; in Europe with CETA; in the United States and Mexico with the new NAFTA; and in Ukraine with a modernized CUFTA. These agreements mean good jobs and good salaries for people across the country.
However, this is only true when Canadian workers and businesses are competing on an even playing field, and countries respect agreed trade rules.
That is why the government has taken steps to ensure that Canada’s trade remedy and import monitoring systems have the tools needed to defend Canadian workers and businesses from unfair practices of foreign competitors. For instance, earlier this year, Canada introduced a system to track the countries steel imports are initially melted and poured in, to increase supply chain transparency and support effective enforcement of Canada’s trade laws.
Budget 2024 proposes to provide $10.5 million over three years, starting in 2024-25, for the Canada Border Services Agency to create a dedicated Market Watch Unit to monitor and update trade remedy measures annually, to protect Canadian workers and businesses from unfair trade practices, and ensure greater transparency and market predictability.
Ensuring Reciprocal Treatment for Canadian Businesses Abroad
Canada is taking action to protect Canadian businesses and workers from additional global economic and trade challenges. These challenges include protectionist and non-market policies and practices implemented by our trading partners. When Canada opens its markets to goods and services from other countries, we expect those countries to equally grant Canadian businesses the access that we provide their companies.
As detailed in the Policy Statement on Ensuring Reciprocal Treatment for Canadian Businesses Abroad, published alongside the 2023 Fall Economic Statement, Canada will consider reciprocity as a key design element for new policies going forward. This approach builds on Canada’s commitment to implement reciprocal procurement policies, including for infrastructure and sub-national infrastructure spending, in the near term. A reciprocal lens will also be applied to a range of new measures including, but not limited to, investment tax incentives, grants and contributions, technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, investment restrictions, and intellectual property requirements.
In pursuing reciprocity, Canada will continue working with its allies to introduce incentives for businesses to reorient supply chains to trusted, reliable partners, and will ensure that any new measures do not unnecessarily harm trading partners who do not discriminate against Canadian goods and suppliers.
Protecting Critical Supply Chains
Recent events around the world, from the pandemic to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, have exposed strategic vulnerabilities in critical supply chains, to which Canada and countries around the world are responding by derisking, or friendshoring, their supply chains. Canada is actively working with its allies to strengthen shared supply chains and deepen our economic ties with trusted partners, including in the context of accelerating the transition to a net-zero economy.
Ongoing efforts to build our critical supply chains through democracies like our own represent a significant economic opportunity for Canadian businesses and workers, and the government will continue to design domestic policies and programs with friendshoring as a top-of-mind objective.
To reinforce Canada’s role as a trusted supply chain partner for our allies, Budget 2023 took action to mobilize private investment and grow Canada’s economy towards net-zero. These investments are growing Canada’s economic capacity in industries across the economy, while simultaneously reducing Canada’s emissions and strengthening our essential trading relationships.
Eradicating Forced Labour from Canadian Supply Chains
Canada is gravely concerned by the ongoing human rights violations against Uyghurs and Muslim minorities in China, as well as by the use of forced labour around the world.
Budget 2024 reaffirms the federal government’s commitment to introduce legislation in 2024 to eradicate forced labour from Canadian supply chains and to strengthen the import ban on goods produced with forced labour. The government will also work to ensure existing legislation fits within the overall framework to safeguard our supply chains.
This will build on funding committed in the 2023 Fall Economic Statement that, starting January 1, 2024, supports the requirement for annual reporting from public and private entities to demonstrate measures they have taken to prevent and reduce the risk that forced labour is used in their supply chains.
…
Before moving on to an interesting analysis of the defence portion of the 2024 budget by someone else, here’s a link to the national defence policy, Our North, Strong and Free: A Renewed Vision for Canada’s Defence, which was released on April 8, 2024 just days before the April 16, 2024 release date for this latest federal budget.
It seems there was a shift in policy during the nine-day interval. From Murray Brewster’s April 16, 2024 article for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC) news online website, Note: Links have been removed,
The new federal budget promises good things will happen at the Department of National Defence … next year, and hopefully in the years after.
The new fiscal plan, presented Tuesday by Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, marks a subtle but significant shift from what was proposed in last week’s long-awaited defence policy [emphasis mine], which committed to spending an additional $8.1 billion on defence.
The funding envelope in the budget earmarks the same amount but includes not only the defence department but proposed spending on both the Communications Security Establishment — the country’s electronic spy agency — and Global Affairs Canada. [emphases mine]
While the overall defence budget is expected to increase marginally in the current fiscal year to $33.8 billion, defence experts told CBC News that when the internal cost-cutting exercise ordered by the Liberal government and the new defence policy are factored in, the military can expect roughly $635 million less this year [emphasis mine] than was anticipated before spending restraint kicked in.
Freeland’s fiscal plan projects a 30 per cent increase in defence spending in the next fiscal year, bringing it to $44.2 billion.
…
This is how I understand what Brewster is saying:
2024/25 defence budget as listed is $33.8B
Not all of this money is going directly to defence (the Communications Security Establishment and Global Affairs Canada will be partaking)
the defence department has been ordered to cut costs
so, there will be $635M less than defence might have expected
in 2025/26 defence spending will be increased to $44.2 billion, whatever that means
That’s quite the dance and Brewster’s April 16, 2024 article points out at least one more weakness,
Sahir Khan, the executive vice-president of the University of Ottawa’s Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy, said he would love to see the specifics.
“That’s one of the difficulties, I think, with this government is we have seen a lot of aspiration, but not always the perspiration,” said Khan, a former deputy parliamentary budget officer. “What is the plan to achieve the results?”
The politically charged promise to increase Canada’s defence spending to 1.76 per cent of the gross domestic product by the end of the decade could be left in doubt when the spending plans are laid alongside the budget’s economic projections during that time frame.
Generally, the better the economy does, the more the defence budget would have to be increased to meet the target.
“It’s really unclear how we actually get to 1.76 per cent of GDP, if you take the figures that are presented which outline how spending is going to increase,” said Dave Perry, a defence expert and president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
“You can’t put that against the nominal GDP projection provided in the budget” and then add in other government departments, such as Veterans Affairs Canada, “and get anywhere close” to the GDP projection in the defence policy, he said.
About five weeks after the budget was released, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau received a letter, from a May 23, 2024 article by Alexander Panetta for CBC News online,
Nearly one-quarter of the members of the United States Senate have sent an unusually critical letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressing dismay over Canada’s level of defence spending.
They pressed Trudeau to come to this summer’s NATO summit with a plan to fulfil Canada’s commitment to reach the alliance’s longstanding spending target.
The letter from 23 members of the U.S. Senate, from both parties, represents a dramatic and public escalation of pressure from Washington over a longstanding bilateral irritant.
…
That written critique [letter] comes just days after Defence Minister Bill Blair completed what he referred to as a productive trip to Washington to promote Canada’s new military strategy.
“We are concerned and profoundly disappointed,” says the letter, referring to the spending levels in the strategy Blair came to promote.
A bipartisan pair of U.S. senators say they expect Canada and the U.S. to work collaboratively on shared issues of defence and the border, but suggested Ottawa’s policies on military spending need to change to speed up progress.
Speaking to Mercedes Stephenson from the Halifax International Security Forum in an interview that aired Sunday on The West Block, Republican Sen. James Risch of Idaho and Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire downplayed concerns that incoming president-elect Donald Trump will penalize Canada on things like trade if it doesn’t step up on defence spending.
…
As far as I’m concerned, this budget offers some moderate gains from a science and technology perspective and with regard to military spending, it seems a little lacklustre overall and with regard to military research, that might be called nonexistent.
After celebrating its 15th anniversary in 2023 with an eye-watering price increase of over 20% for most categories (e.g., a standard registration rose from $990 to $1200 for the conference and gala dinner at the super saver rate; see my July 28, 2023 posting for more details), the Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC) has increased its prices by a little over 4% this year (e.g., $1250 for the conference and gala dinner at the super saver rate)..Of course, the inflation rate in Canada, according to the latest statistics (Statistics Canada June 25, 2024 news release) was 2.9% in May 2024.
Here are the currently available details about the 2024 conference, from the What To Expect webpage (apparently the conference is going be ‘spectacular’),
This year’s conference is in person from Nov 20th to 22nd [2024] with spectacular panels and programs.
CSPC 2024 features a spectacular program in different formats:
• 50+ Concurrent Sessions • 5 Plenary Sessions • Three Luncheon Talks • Three Breakfast Sessions • Networking • Gala Dinner
CSPC 2024 is expecting over 1000 participants, and 300+ speakers from across the globe, presenting in 50+ panel sessions covering a wide range of topics grouped in six tracks.
The conference will include a spectacular [emphasis mine] Gala Dinner featuring the Award Ceremony, which has become a signature annual event to celebrate Canadian science and innovation policy achievements.
CSPC 2024 attracts current and future leaders from all sectors and communities of science, innovation, technology, and policy across the country and internationally to discuss the challenges and solutions of our time.
Regarding Day 1, I can guess but really don’t know what ‘brain strategy’ or ‘braiding knowledges’ mean. Innovation is usually code for ‘business’, i.e., how can money be made? The other two seem self-explanatory.
Regarding Days 2 & 3, you can find our about the themes for the five conference tracks for the 50+ sessions on the CSPC 2024 Themes webpage.
Conference and Symposiums: 3 Lunches, 3 breakfasts, refreshment breaks, and one reception. Gala Dinner is included in the Standard registration category.
SuperSaver All summer – Sept 1st
Conference Only
Conference + Symposiums Special SuperSaver Deal: Symposium is Free up to $300 savings
Standard (Gala dinner included)
$1250
Academic/Non-Profit/Diplomat/Retired
$750
Student/Post Doctoral
$250
Early Bird Sept. 2nd – Oct. 5th
Conference Only
Conference + Symposiums $200 savings
Standard (Gala dinner included)
$1250
$1350
Academic/Non-Profit/Diplomat/Retired
$750
$850
Student/Post Doctoral
$300
$350
Regular Rate Oct 6th – Nov 16th
Conference Only
Conference + Symposiums $200 savings
Standard (Gala dinner included)
$1400
$1500
Academic/Non-Profit/Diplomat/Retired
$850
$950
Student/Post Doctoral
$350
$400
Other (Conference Only)
Cost
Speaker One Day (Day of presentation)
$250
Speaker full conference (Conference + Symposiums)
$500
Exhibitor Booth Staff
$800
Symposiums Only (Wednesday, November 20th)
Cost
Standard
$300
Academic/Non-Profit/Diplomat/Retired
$200
Student/Post Doctoral
$100
Gala Dinner Tickets Only (Wednesday, November 20th)
To sum up, the 16th Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC) is being held November 20th-22nd, 2024, at the Westin Ottawa hotel. This is the second posting about the conference here, the first was my April 1, 2024 posting (scroll down to the “2024 Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC): call for proposals” subhead.
For anyone who isn’t familiar with the Canadian science police scene, these conferences are organized by the Canadian Science Policy Centre (CSPC). Yes, they use same abbreviation for the conferences and the centre.
Math and reading scores of Canadian students continue to decline steeply, matching a global trend, according to a new study.
The state of global education was given a bleak appraisal in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which is the first study to examine the academic progress of 15-year-old students in dozens of countries during the pandemic.
Released Tuesday [December 5, 2023], it finds the average international math score fell by the equivalent of 15 points compared to 2018 scores, while reading scores fell 10 points.
The study found Canada’s overall math scores declined 15 points between 2018 and 2022. According to PISA, which defines a drop of 20 points as losing out on a fully year of learning, that means Canada’s math score dropped by an equivalent of three-quarters of a year of learning.
During that same time period, reading scores of Canadian students dropped by 13 points and science by three.
Only 12 per cent of Canadian students were high math achievers, scoring at Level 5 or 6. That’s fewer than some of the top Asian countries and economies: In Singapore, 41 per cent of students performed at the top level; in Hong Kong, 27 per cent; and in Japan and Korea, 23 per cent.
Louis Volante, a professor of education governance at Brock University in St. Catharines, Ont., believes the pandemic had more of a negative effect on math learning than reading and science.
…
‘Some provinces declining more than others’
Anna Stokke, a math professor at the University of Winnipeg, notes that math scores in Canada have been trending in the wrong direction since 2003, “with some provinces declining more than others.”
According to the study, the provinces with the largest drop in math scores since 2018 were Newfoundland Labrador with 29, Nova Scotia with 24, New Brunswick with 23 and Manitoba with 22. Meanwhile, Alberta’s score only dropped by seven and B.C.’s just eight.
“I do think part of the problem is the philosophy of how to teach math,” Stokke told CBC News.
“First of all, we’re not spending enough time on math in schools. And second of all, kids just aren’t getting good instruction in a lot of cases. They’re not getting explicit instruction. They’re not getting enough practice. And that really needs to change.”
…
A survey of students found about half faced closures of more than three months, but it didn’t always lead to lower scores. There was “no clear difference” in performance trends between countries that had limited closures, including Iceland and Sweden, and those with longer closures, including Brazil and Ireland, according to the report.
…
Canada still in top 10
Singapore, long seen as an education powerhouse, had the highest scores by far in every subject. It was joined in the upper echelons by other East Asian countries, including Japan and China.
Despite the declines across the subjects, Canada did well compared to the other countries in the report, placing ninth in math, sixth in reading and seventh in science.
…
Usually given every three years, the latest test was delayed a year because of the pandemic. It was administered in 2022 to a sample of 15-year-olds in 37 countries that are OECD members, plus 44 other partner countries. The test has been conducted since 2000.
In 2022, 81 countries participated, with 23,000 Canadian high school students writing the test.
Wendy Hughes (then PhD student) and Sarfaroz Niyozov (then associate professor) both associated with the University of Toronto, presented a critique of PISA in their June 4, 2019 essay on The Conversation,
The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) — the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) global standardized test of student achievement — is frequently used by commentators to compare and rank national or provincial education systems.
PISA, which has now spread into 80 countries as a best education practice, presents itself as a tool to help countries make their systems more inclusive leading to equitable outcomes. But PISA is far more ambiguous and controversial.
Many academics and educators critique PISA as an economic measurement, not an educational one. The media generally use PISA results to blame and shame school systems. And the way that some politicians, policy-makers and researchers have used PISA is more closely aligned to a political process than an educational one.
Canada’s 2024 federal budget will be presented on April 16, 2024, according to this March 4, 2024 Government of Canada media advisory. About two weeks later the Canadian Science Policy Centre (CSPC) will host their annual budget symposium (Decoding Budget 2024 for Science and Innovation). Here’s more from the March 28, 2024 CSPC announcement (received via email),
The CSPC Budget Symposium will be held on Wednesday May 1, 2024 starting at 12pm. The Symposium will feature a detailed budget analysis presented by David Watters and Omer Kaya from Global Advantage Consulting Group followed by panel discussions with leaders from across the country, representing academic, business, and non-profit sectors.
Kaya and Watters were both scheduled to speak at last year’s (2023) federal budget symposium and both have been guest speakers in years previous to 2023. Presumably more speakers and specific topics will be identified as the May 1, 2024 budget symposium draws nearer.
2024 Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC): call for proposals
I gather the conference organizers (the Canadian Science Policy Centre) are short of ‘panel proposals’ but have enough ‘short talk proposals’ as the the March 28, 2024 CSPC announcement (received via email) highlights the panels only,
Call for Panel Proposals, Three Weeks Left to the Deadline: April 19, 2024 *(extended to April 26, 2024)* and then **(further extended to May 1, 2024)**
The call for proposals is open with only 3 weeks left until the submission deadline of Friday, April 19, 2024. We invite you to submit proposals that revolve around any of the conference’s six tracks. The theme and topics can be viewed by clicking here, and the submission criteria and panel formats on our website at the link below.
November 20th-22nd, 2024, at the Westin Ottawa hotel
CSPC 2024 Theme:
Empowering Society: The Transformative Value of Science, Knowledge, and Innovation
The 16th Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC 2024), will be held in person on November 20th – 22nd, 2024. The conference expects 1000+ participants, more than 300 speakers, in 60 panel sessions. CSPC 2024 will also include a spectacular Gala dinner featuring its award ceremony which has become a signature annual event to celebrate Canadian science and innovation policy achievements.
We invite you to submit proposals in a variety of presentation formats that revolve around any of the conference topics. …
Track One: Science, Knowledge, and Policy
*The national STI ecosystem: Strategy for the next ten years; building on strengths and opportunities; addressing weaknesses *Managing the evolving/changing research landscape: AI, Open Science *Evidence for policy *Science policy futures …
Track Two: Science, Knowledge, and Society
… *Systemic racism, otherism … *Science, Knowledge, and Truth and Reconciliation *Ethics of emerging technologies … *Citizen Scientist …
Track Three: Innovation Policy and Economic Development
*Emerging economic opportunities *Emerging and disruptive technologies … *Scale up and commercialization …
Track Four: Science, International Affairs and Security
… *Science diplomacy, research security and geopolitics *Scientists on the move
Track Five: Science and the Next Generation
… *Enabling the next generation of researchers with non-research skills *Trainees’ well-being *Grassroots science policy networks, opportunities and lessons learned …
Track Six: Grand Challenges – Adaptation, Resilience, Canada’s Role
*Climate change *The North *Food, agriculture, water …
Having published an earlier January 2024 US National Science Foundation (NSF) funding announcement for the TRAILS (Trustworthy AI in Law & Society) Institute yesterday (February 21, 2024), I’m following up with an announcement about the initiative’s first round of seed funding.
The Institute for Trustworthy AI in Law & Society (TRAILS) has unveiled an inaugural round of seed grants designed to integrate a greater diversity of stakeholders into the artificial intelligence (AI) development and governance lifecycle, ultimately creating positive feedback loops to improve trustworthiness, accessibility and efficacy in AI-infused systems.
The eight grants announced on January 24, 2024—ranging from $100K to $150K apiece and totaling just over $1.5 million—were awarded to interdisciplinary teams of faculty associated with the institute. Funded projects include developing AI chatbots to assist with smoking cessation, designing animal-like robots that can improve autism-specific support at home, and exploring how people use and rely upon AI-generated language translation systems.
All eight projects fall under the broader mission of TRAILS, which is to transform the practice of AI from one driven primarily by technological innovation to one that is driven by ethics, human rights, and input and feedback from communities whose voices have previously been marginalized.
“At the speed with which AI is developing, our seed grant program will enable us to keep pace—or even stay one step ahead—by incentivizing cutting-edge research and scholarship that spans AI design, development and governance,” said Hal Daumé III, a professor of computer science at the University of Maryland who is the director of TRAILS.
After TRAILS was launched in May 2023 with a $20 million award from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), lead faculty met to brainstorm how the institute could best move forward with research, innovation and outreach that would have a meaningful impact.
They determined a seed grant program could quickly leverage the wide range of academic talent at TRAILS’ four primary institutions. This includes the University of Maryland’s expertise in computing and human-computer interaction; George Washington University’s strengths in systems engineering and AI as it relates to law and governance; Morgan State University’s work in addressing bias and inequity in AI; and Cornell University’s research in human behavior and decision-making.
“NIST and NSF’s support of TRAILS enables us to create a structured mechanism to reach across academic and institutional boundaries in search of innovative solutions,” said David Broniatowski, an associate professor of engineering management and systems engineering at George Washington University who leads TRAILS activities on the GW campus. “Seed funding from TRAILS will enable multidisciplinary teams to identify opportunities for their research to have impact, and to build the case for even larger, multi-institutional efforts.”
Further discussions were held at a TRAILS faculty retreat to identify seed grant guidelines and collaborative themes that mirror TRAILS’ primary research thrusts—participatory design, methods and metrics, evaluating trust, and participatory governance.
“Some of the funded projects are taking a fresh look at ideas we may have already been working on individually, and others are taking an entirely new approach to timely, pressing issues involving AI and machine learning,” said Virginia Byrne, an assistant professor of higher education & student affairs at Morgan State who is leading TRAILS activities on that campus and who served on the seed grant review committee.
A second round of seed funding will be announced later this year, said Darren Cambridge, who was recently hired as managing director of TRAILS to lead its day-to-day operations.
Projects selected in the first round are eligible for a renewal, while other TRAILS faculty—or any faculty member at the four primary TRAILS institutions—can submit new proposals for consideration, Cambridge said.
Ultimately, the seed funding program is expected to strengthen and incentivize other TRAILS activities that are now taking shape, including K–12 education and outreach programs, AI policy seminars and workshops on Capitol Hill, and multiple postdoc opportunities for early-career researchers.
“We want TRAILS to be the ‘go-to’ resource for educators, policymakers and others who are seeking answers and solutions on how to build, manage and use AI systems that will benefit all of society,” Cambridge said.
The eight projects selected for the first round of TRAILS seed-funding are:
Chung Hyuk Park and Zoe Szajnfarber from GW and Hernisa Kacorri from UMD aim to improve the support infrastructure and access to quality care for families of autistic children. Early interventions are strongly correlated with positive outcomes, while provider shortages and financial burdens have raised challenges—particularly for families without sufficient resources and experience. The researchers will develop novel parent-robot teaming for the home, advance the assistive technology, and assess the impact of teaming to promote more trust in human-robot collaborative settings.
Soheil Feizi from UMD and Robert Brauneis from GW will investigate various issues surrounding text-to-image [emphasis mine] generative AI models like Stable Diffusion, DALL-E 2, and Midjourney, focusing on myriad legal, aesthetic and computational aspects that are currently unresolved. A key question is how copyright law might adapt if these tools create works in an artist’s style. The team will explore how generative AI models represent individual artists’ styles, and whether those representations are complex and distinctive enough to form stable objects of protection. The researchers will also explore legal and technical questions to determine if specific artworks, especially rare and unique ones, have already been used to train AI models.
Huaishu Peng and Ge Gao from UMD will work with Malte Jung from Cornell to increase trust-building in embodied AI systems, which bridge the gap between computers and human physical senses. Specifically, the researchers will explore embodied AI systems in the form of miniaturized on-body or desktop robotic systems that can enable the exchange of nonverbal cues between blind and sighted individuals, an essential component of efficient collaboration. The researchers will also examine multiple factors—both physical and mental—in order to gain a deeper understanding of both groups’ values related to teamwork facilitated by embodied AI.
Marine Carpuat and Ge Gao from UMD will explore “mental models”—how humans perceive things—for language translation systems used by millions of people daily. They will focus on how individuals, depending on their language fluency and familiarity with the technology, make sense of their “error boundary”—that is, deciding whether an AI-generated translation is correct or incorrect. The team will also develop innovative techniques to teach users how to improve their mental models as they interact with machine translation systems.
Hal Daumé III, Furong Huang and Zubin Jelveh from UMD and Donald Braman from GW will propose new philosophies grounded in law to conceptualize, evaluate and achieve “effort-aware fairness,” which involves algorithms for determining whether an individual or a group of individuals is discriminated against in terms of equality of effort. The researchers will develop new metrics, evaluate fairness of datasets, and design novel algorithms that enable AI auditors to uncover and potentially correct unfair decisions.
Lorien Abroms and David Broniatowski from GW will recruit smokers to study the reliability of using generative chatbots, such as ChatGPT, as the basis for a digital smoking cessation program. Additional work will examine the acceptability by smokers and their perceptions of trust in using this rapidly evolving technology for help to quit smoking. The researchers hope their study will directly inform future digital interventions for smoking cessation and/or modifying other health behaviors.
Adam Aviv from GW and Michelle Mazurek from UMD will examine bias, unfairness and untruths such as sexism, racism and other forms of misrepresentation that come out of certain AI and machine learning systems. Though some systems have public warnings of potential biases, the researchers want to explore how users understand these warnings, if they recognize how biases may manifest themselves in the AI-generated responses, and how users attempt to expose, mitigate and manage potentially biased responses.
Susan Ariel Aaronson and David Broniatowski from GW plan to create a prototype of a searchable, easy-to-use website to enable policymakers to better utilize academic research related to trustworthy and participatory AI. The team will analyze research publications by TRAILS-affiliated researchers to ascertain which ones may have policy implications. Then, each relevant publication will be summarized and categorized by research questions, issues, keywords, and relevant policymaking uses. The resulting database prototype will enable the researchers to test the utility of this resource for policymakers over time.
Yes, things are moving quickly where AI is concerned. There’s text-to-image being investigated by Soheil Feizi and Robert Brauneis and, since the funding announcement in early January 2024, text-to-video has been announced (Open AI’s Sora was previewed February 15, 2024). I wonder if that will be added to the project.
One more comment, Huaishu Peng’s, Ge Gao’s, and Malte Jung’s project for “… trust-building in embodied AI systems …” brings to mind Elon Musk’s stated goal of using brain implants for“human/AI symbiosis.” (I have more about that in an upcoming post.) Hopefully, Susan Ariel Aaronson’s and David Broniatowski’s proposed website for policymakers will be able to keep up with what’s happening in the field of AI, including research on the impact of private investments primarily designed for generating profits.
My personal theme for this last year (2023) and for the coming year was and is: catching up. On the plus side, my 2023 backlog (roughly six months) to be published was whittled down considerably. On the minus side, I start 2024 with a backlog of two to three months.
2023 on this blog had a lot in common with 2022 (see my December 31, 2022 posting), which may be due to what’s going on in the world of emerging science and technology or to my personal interests or possibly a bit of both. On to 2023 and a further blurring of boundaries:
Energy, computing and the environment
The argument against paper is that it uses up resources, it’s polluting, it’s affecting the environment, etc. Somehow the part where electricity which underpins so much of our ‘smart’ society does the same thing is left out of the discussion.
Neuromorphic (brainlike) computing and lower energy
Before launching into the stories about lowering energy usage, here’s an October 16, 2023 posting “The cost of building ChatGPT” that gives you some idea of the consequences of our insatiable desire for more computing and more ‘smart’ devices,
…
In its latest environmental report, Microsoft disclosed that its global water consumption spiked 34% from 2021 to 2022 (to nearly 1.7 billion gallons , or more than 2,500 Olympic-sized swimming pools), a sharp increase compared to previous years that outside researchers tie to its AI research. [emphases mine]
“It’s fair to say the majority of the growth is due to AI,” including “its heavy investment in generative AI and partnership with OpenAI,” said Shaolei Ren, [emphasis mine] a researcher at the University of California, Riverside who has been trying to calculate the environmental impact of generative AI products such as ChatGPT.
…
Why it matters: Microsoft’s five WDM [West Des Moines in Iowa] data centers — the “epicenter for advancing AI” — represent more than $5 billion in investments in the last 15 years.
Yes, but: They consumed as much as 11.5 million gallons of water a month for cooling, or about 6% of WDM’s total usage during peak summer usage during the last two years, according to information from West Des Moines Water Works.
The focus is AI but it doesn’t take long to realize that all computing has energy and environmental costs. I have more about Ren’s work and about water shortages in the “The cost of building ChatGPT” posting.
This next posting would usually be included with my other art/sci postings but it touches on the issues. My October 13, 2023 posting about Toronto’s Art/Sci Salon events, in particular, there’s the Streaming Carbon Footprint event (just scroll down to the appropriate subhead). For the interested, I also found this 2022 paper “The Carbon Footprint of Streaming Media:; Problems, Calculations, Solutions” co-authored by one of the artist/researchers (Laura U. Marks, philosopher and scholar of new media and film at Simon Fraser University) who presented at the Toronto event.
I’m late to the party; Thomas Daigle posted a January 2, 2020 article about energy use and our appetite for computing and ‘smart’ devices for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s online news,
For those of us binge-watching TV shows, installing new smartphone apps or sharing family photos on social media over the holidays, it may seem like an abstract predicament.
The gigabytes of data we’re using — although invisible — come at a significant cost to the environment. Some experts say it rivals that of the airline industry.
And as more smart devices rely on data to operate (think internet-connected refrigerators or self-driving cars), their electricity demands are set to skyrocket.
“We are using an immense amount of energy to drive this data revolution,” said Jane Kearns, an environment and technology expert at MaRS Discovery District, an innovation hub in Toronto.
“It has real implications for our climate.”
…
Some good news
Researchers are working on ways to lower the energy and environmental costs, here’s a sampling of 2023 posts with an emphasis on brainlike computing that attest to it,
Most people are familiar with nuclear fission and some its attendant issues. There is an alternative nuclear energy, fusion, which is considered ‘green’ or greener anyway. General Fusion is a local (Vancouver area) company focused on developing fusion energy, alongside competitors from all over the planet.
Part of what makes fusion energy attractive is that salt water or sea water can be used in its production and, according to that December posting, there are other applications for salt water power,
More encouraging developments in environmental science
Again, this is a selection. You’ll find a number of nano cellulose research projects and a couple of seaweed projects (seaweed research seems to be of increasing interest).
Neuromorphic computing is a subset of neuromorphic engineering and I stumbled across an article that outlines the similarities and differences. My ‘summary’ of the main points and a link to the original article can be found here,
I included an overview of the various ‘recent’ panics (in my May 25, 2023 posting below) along with a few other posts about concerning developments but it’s not all doom and gloom..
Governments have realized that regulation might be a good idea. The European Union has a n AI act, the UK held an AI Safety Summit in November 2023, the US has been discussing AI regulation with its various hearings, and there’s impending legislation in Canada (see professor and lawyer Michael Geist’s blog for more).
A long time coming, a nanomedicine comeuppance
Paolo Macchiarini is now infamous for his untested, dangerous approach to medicine. Like a lot of people, I was fooled too as you can see in my August 2, 2011 posting, “Body parts nano style,”
In early July 2011, there were reports of a new kind of transplant involving a body part made of a biocomposite. Andemariam Teklesenbet Beyene underwent a trachea transplant that required an artificial windpipe crafted by UK experts then flown to Sweden where Beyene’s stem cells were used to coat the windpipe before being transplanted into his body.
It is an extraordinary story not least because Beyene, a patient in a Swedish hospital planning to return to Eritrea after his PhD studies in Iceland, illustrates the international cooperation that made the transplant possible.
The scaffolding material for the artificial windpipe was developed by Professor Alex Seifalian at the University College London in a landmark piece of nanotechnology-enabled tissue engineering. …
This year, Gretchen Vogel (whose work was featured in my 2016 posts) has written a June 21, 2023 update about the Macchiarini affair for Science magazine, Note: Links have been removed,
Surgeon Paolo Macchiarini, who was once hailed as a pioneer of stem cell medicine, was found guilty of gross assault against three of his patients today and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison by an appeals court in Stockholm. The ruling comes a year after a Swedish district court found Macchiarini guilty of bodily harm in two of the cases and gave him a suspended sentence. After both the prosecution and Macchiarini appealed that ruling, the Svea Court of Appeal heard the case in April and May. Today’s ruling from the five-judge panel is largely a win for the prosecution—it had asked for a 5-year sentence whereas Macchiarini’s lawyer urged the appeals court to acquit him of all charges.
Macchiarini performed experimental surgeries on the three patients in 2011 and 2012 while working at the renowned Karolinska Institute. He implanted synthetic windpipes seeded with stem cells from the patients’ own bone marrow, with the hope the cells would multiply over time and provide an enduring replacement. All three patients died when the implants failed. One patient died suddenly when the implant caused massive bleeding just 4 months after it was implanted; the two others survived for 2.5 and nearly 5 years, respectively, but suffered painful and debilitating complications before their deaths.
In the ruling released today, the appeals judges disagreed with the district court’s decision that the first two patients were treated under “emergency” conditions. Both patients could have survived for a significant length of time without the surgeries, they said. The third case was an “emergency,” the court ruled, but the treatment was still indefensible because by then Macchiarini was well aware of the problems with the technique. (One patient had already died and the other had suffered severe complications.)
…
A fictionalized tv series ( part of the Dr. Death anthology series) based on Macchiarini’s deceptions and a Dr. Death documentary are being broadcast/streamed in the US during January 2024. These come on the heels of a November 2023 Macchiarini documentary also broadcast/streamed on US television.
Dr. Death (anthology), based on the previews I’ve seen, is heavily US-centric, which is to be expected since Adam Ciralsky is involved in the production. Ciralsky wrote an exposé about Macchiarini for Vanity Fair published in 2016 (also featured in my 2016 postings). From a December 20, 2023 article by Julie Miller for Vanity Fair, Note: A link has been removed,
Seven years ago [2016], world-renowned surgeon Paolo Macchiarini was the subject of an ongoing Vanity Fair investigation. He had seduced award-winning NBC producer Benita Alexander while she was making a special about him, proposed, and promised her a wedding officiated by Pope Francis and attended by political A-listers. It was only after her designer wedding gown was made that Alexander learned Macchiarini was still married to his wife, and seemingly had no association with the famous names on their guest list.
Vanity Fair contributor Adam Ciralsky was in the midst of reporting the story for this magazine in the fall of 2015 when he turned to Dr. Ronald Schouten, a Harvard psychiatry professor. Ciralsky sought expert insight into the kind of fabulist who would invent and engage in such an audacious lie.
“I laid out the story to him, and he said, ‘Anybody who does this in their private life engages in the same conduct in their professional life,” recalls Ciralsky, in a phone call with Vanity Fair. “I think you ought to take a hard look at his CVs.”
That was the turning point in the story for Ciralsky, a former CIA lawyer who soon learned that Macchiarini was more dangerous as a surgeon than a suitor. …
Here’s a link to Ciralsky’s original article, which I described this way, from my April 19, 2016 posting (part 2 of the Macchiarini controversy),
For some bizarre frosting on this disturbing cake (see part 1 of the Macchiarini controversy and synthetic trachea transplants for the medical science aspects), a January 5, 2016 Vanity Fair article by Adam Ciralsky documents Macchiarini’s courtship of an NBC ([US] National Broadcasting Corporation) news producer who was preparing a documentary about him and his work.
[from Ciralsky’s article]
“Macchiarini, 57, is a magnet for superlatives. He is commonly referred to as “world-renowned” and a “super-surgeon.” He is credited with medical miracles, including the world’s first synthetic organ transplant, which involved fashioning a trachea, or windpipe, out of plastic and then coating it with a patient’s own stem cells. That feat, in 2011, appeared to solve two of medicine’s more intractable problems—organ rejection and the lack of donor organs—and brought with it major media exposure for Macchiarini and his employer, Stockholm’s Karolinska Institute, home of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Macchiarini was now planning another first: a synthetic-trachea transplant on a child, a two-year-old Korean-Canadian girl named Hannah Warren, who had spent her entire life in a Seoul hospital. … “
Other players in the Macchiarini story
Pierre Delaere, a trachea expert and professor of head and neck surgery at KU Leuven (a university in Belgium) was one of the first to draw attention to Macchiarini’s dangerous and unethical practices. To give you an idea of how difficult it was to get attention for this issue, there’s a September 1, 2017 article by John Rasko and Carl Power for the Guardian illustrating the issue. Here’s what they had to say about Delaere and other early critics of the work, Note: Links have been removed,
…
Delaere was one of the earliest and harshest critics of Macchiarini’s engineered airways. Reports of their success always seemed like “hot air” to him. He could see no real evidence that the windpipe scaffolds were becoming living, functioning airways – in which case, they were destined to fail. The only question was how long it would take – weeks, months or a few years.
Delaere’s damning criticisms appeared in major medical journals, including the Lancet, but weren’t taken seriously by Karolinska’s leadership. Nor did they impress the institute’s ethics council when Delaere lodged a formal complaint. [emphases mine]
Support for Macchiarini remained strong, even as his patients began to die. In part, this is because the field of windpipe repair is a niche area. Few people at Karolinska, especially among those in power, knew enough about it to appreciate Delaere’s claims. Also, in such a highly competitive environment, people are keen to show allegiance to their superiors and wary of criticising them. The official report into the matter dubbed this the “bandwagon effect”.
With Macchiarini’s exploits endorsed by management and breathlessly reported in the media, it was all too easy to jump on that bandwagon.
And difficult to jump off. In early 2014, four Karolinska doctors defied the reigning culture of silence [emphasis mine] by complaining about Macchiarini. In their view, he was grossly misrepresenting his results and the health of his patients. An independent investigator agreed. But the vice-chancellor of Karolinska Institute, Anders Hamsten, wasn’t bound by this judgement. He officially cleared Macchiarini of scientific misconduct, allowing merely that he’d sometimes acted “without due care”.
For their efforts, the whistleblowers were punished. [emphasis mine] When Macchiarini accused one of them, Karl-Henrik Grinnemo, of stealing his work in a grant application, Hamsten found him guilty. As Grinnemo recalls, it nearly destroyed his career: “I didn’t receive any new grants. No one wanted to collaborate with me. We were doing good research, but it didn’t matter … I thought I was going to lose my lab, my staff – everything.”
This went on for three years until, just recently [2017], Grinnemo was cleared of all wrongdoing.
…
It is fitting that Macchiarini’s career unravelled at the Karolinska Institute. As the home of the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine, one of its ambitions is to create scientific celebrities. Every year, it gives science a show-business makeover, picking out from the mass of medical researchers those individuals deserving of superstardom. The idea is that scientific progress is driven by the genius of a few.
It’s a problematic idea with unfortunate side effects. A genius is a revolutionary by definition, a risk-taker and a law-breaker. Wasn’t something of this idea behind the special treatment Karolinska gave Macchiarini? Surely, he got away with so much because he was considered an exception to the rules with more than a whiff of the Nobel about him. At any rate, some of his most powerful friends were themselves Nobel judges until, with his fall from grace, they fell too.
…
The September 1, 2017 article by Rasko and Power is worth the read if you have the interest and the time. And, Delaere has written up a comprehensive analysis, which includes basic information about tracheas and more, “The Biggest Lie in Medical History” 2020, PDF, 164 pp., Creative Commons Licence).
I also want to mention Leonid Schneider, science journalist and molecular cell biologist, whose work the Macchiarini scandal on his ‘For Better Science’ website was also featured in my 2016 pieces. Schneider’s site has a page titled, ‘Macchiarini’s trachea transplant patients: the full list‘ started in 2017 and which he continues to update with new information about the patients. The latest update was made on December 20, 2023.
Promising nanomedicine research but no promises and a caveat
Most of the research mentioned here is still in the laboratory. i don’t often come across work that has made its way to clinical trials since the focus of this blog is emerging science and technology,
*If you’re interested in the business of neurotechnology, the July 17, 2023 posting highlights a very good UNESCO report on the topic.
Funky music (sound and noise)
I have couple of stories about using sound for wound healing, bioinspiration for soundproofing applications, detecting seismic activity, more data sonification, etc.
I didn’t realize how active the year was art/sciwise including events and other projects until I reviewed this year’s postings. This is a selection from 2023 but there’s a lot more on the blog, just use the search term, “art/sci,” or “art/science,” or “sciart.”
2023 featured an unusual budget where military expenditures were going to be increased, something which could have implications for our science and technology research.
Then things changed as Murray Brewster’s November 21, 2023 article for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC) news online website comments, Note: A link has been removed,
There was a revelatory moment on the weekend as Defence Minister Bill Blair attempted to bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality in the Liberal government’s spending plans for his department and the Canadian military.
Asked about an anticipated (and long overdue) update to the country’s defence policy (supposedly made urgent two years ago by Russia’s full-on invasion of Ukraine), Blair acknowledged that the reset is now being viewed through a fiscal lens.
“We said we’re going to bring forward a new defence policy update. We’ve been working through that,” Blair told CBC’s Rosemary Barton Live on Sunday.
“The current fiscal environment that the country faces itself does require (that) that defence policy update … recognize (the) fiscal challenges. And so it’ll be part of … our future budget processes.”
…
One policy goal of the existing defence plan, Strong, Secure and Engaged, was to require that the military be able to concurrently deliver “two sustained deployments of 500 [to] 1,500 personnel in two different theaters of operation, including one as a lead nation.”
In a footnote, the recent estimates said the Canadian military is “currently unable to conduct multiple operations concurrently per the requirements laid out in the 2017 Defence Policy. Readiness of CAF force elements has continued to decrease over the course of the last year, aggravated by decreasing number of personnel and issues with equipment and vehicles.”
Some analysts say they believe that even if the federal government hits its overall budget reduction targets, what has been taken away from defence — and what’s about to be taken away — won’t be coming back, the minister’s public assurances notwithstanding.
…
10 years: Graphene Flagship Project and Human Brain Project
“Graphene and Human Brain Project win biggest research award in history (& this is the 2000th post)” on January 28, 2013 was how I announced the results of what had been a a European Union (EU) competition that stretched out over several years and many stages as projects were evaluated and fell to the wayside or were allowed onto the next stage. The two finalists received €1B each to be paid out over ten years.
As you can see, there was plenty of interesting stuff going on in 2023 but no watershed moments in the areas I follow. (Please do let me know in the Comments should you disagree with this or any other part of this posting.) Nanotechnology seems less and less an emerging science/technology in itself and more like a foundational element of our science and technology sectors. On that note, you may find my upcoming (in 2024) post about a report concerning the economic impact of its National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) from 2002 to 2022 of interest.
Following on the commercialization theme, I have noticed an increase of interest in commercializing brain and brainlike engineering technologies, as well as, more discussion about ethics.
Meanwhile, Australia has been producing some very interesting mind/robot research, my June 13, 2023 posting, “Mind-controlled robots based on graphene: an Australian research story.” I have more of this kind of research (mind control or mind reading) from Australia to be published in early 2024. The Australians are not alone, there’s also this April 12, 2023 posting, “Mind-reading prosthetic limbs” from Germany.
I haven’t singled it out in this end-of-year posting but there is a great deal of interest in quantum computer both here in Canada and elsewhere. There is a 2023 report from the Council of Canadian Academies on the topic of quantum computing in Canada, which I hope to comment on soon.
Final words
I have a shout out for the Canadian Science Policy Centre, which celebrated its 15th anniversary in 2023. Congratulations!
For everyone, I wish peace on earth and all the best for you and yours in 2024!
Having neither the research skills nor the resources to investigate the impact *that* money (and power) have on science in Canada, more specifically, on our fisheries and oceans, I have to thank the Canadian Science Media Centre for the link to a paper on the topic.
Twenty-six years ago, in response to regionally devastating fisheries collapses [collapse of Maritime provinces cod fisheries] in Canada, Hutchings et al. asked “Is scientific inquiry incompatible with government information control?” Now, a quarter-century later, we review how government science advice continues to be influenced by non-science interests, particularly those with a financial stake in the outcome of the advice. We use the example of salmon aquaculture in British Columbia, Canada, to demonstrate how science advice from Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) can fail to be impartial, evidence-based, transparent, and independently reviewed—four widely implemented standards of robust science advice. Consequently, DFO’s policies are not always supported by the best available science. These observations are particularly important in the context of DFO having struggled to sustainably manage Canada’s marine resources, creating socio-economic uncertainty and putting the country’s international reputation at risk as it lags behind its peers. We conclude by reiterating Hutchings et al.’s unheeded recommendation for a truly independent fisheries-science advisory body in Canada to be enshrined in the decision-making process.
Over a quarter of a century later, the cod fisheries and others are in dire conditions, Note: Links have been removed,
… numerous Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) populations are at historically low abundances (Peterman and Dorner 2012; Riddell et al. 2013; Bendriem et al. 2019; COSEWIC 2019), and Canada’s Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) stocks remain in a “critical” state (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2020).
… Science advice is integral to DFO’s [Department of Fisheries and Oceans] role, but the provision of Canadian fisheries-science advice is challenging, due not only to the diversity and large geographic scale of Canada’s ocean environments, but also to the pitfalls inherent in providing science advice.
Although science can play an important role in the mitigation and reversal of anthropogenic stresses by supplying evidence for policy decisions, competing interests and ideologies can impede the delivery of robust science advice and its integration into government policy decisions. In particular, individuals or groups with vested interests can manipulate the science-policy process through the “disinformation playbook” (Reed et al. 2021)—a collection of strategies that downplay and obscure risk by seeding doubt about scientific consensus (Freudenburg et al. 2008). These tactics can be used to discount the connections between negative health or environmental outcomes and their corporate or industrial causes, at times resulting in regulatory capture, a “process by which regulation… is consistently or repeatedly directed away from the public interest and toward the interests of the regulated industry, by the intent and action of the industry itself” (Carpenter and Moss 2013). Examples of regulatory capture exist in relation to cancers from tobacco use, bird-population declines from dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), ozone-layer depletion from chlorofluorocarbons, and climate change from greenhouse gas emissions (Oreskes and Conway 2010; Anker et al. 2011).
Reassuringly, governments commonly seek to incorporate evidence and scientific findings to strengthen policy and better inform decision-making. A flagship example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), provides policymakers with regular assessments of the scientific basis for climate change, its impacts and future risks, and options for adaptation and mitigation (Masson-Delmotte et al. 2021). The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) assesses the global extinction risks for animal, fungal, and plant species (IUCN Red List 2022). In Canada, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) (Waples et al. 2013) provides species threat-status assessments whose quality and independence are internationally recognized (Waples et al. 2013). Recently, to inform their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, many national governments drew on science advisory bodies, such as the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) in Canada (Macdonald and Pickering 2009; Ismail et al. 2010).
Salmon aquaculture has had a turbulent history in Canada, particularly on the Pacific coast, where non-native Atlantic salmon comprises 89% of aquaculture production by quantity and 95% by value (FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization] Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022). The controversy on the Pacific coast—where the industry is regulated federally, by DFO, rather than provincially, as in Atlantic Canada—is largely due to the amplification of disease and its transmission from farmed to wild salmon, a concern for salmon farming globally (Garseth et al. 2013; Krkošek 2017; Kibenge 2019; Mordecai et al. 2021). The Pacific coast of Canada is perhaps the only region in the world where salmon farming was developed alongside abundant, viable wild salmon stocks (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022). In this context, widespread declines of many wild Pacific salmon populations (Peterman and Dorner 2012; Riddell et al. 2013; Bendriem et al. 2019, 2019), in parallel with growing evidence of the ecological effects of salmon farms, have eroded the social license for the industry to operate (Wiber et al. 2021; Reid et al. 2022). …
The quality of DFO’s science advice on salmon farming in BC is particularly important in the context of growing evidence that (due to multiple causes) wild salmon are not thriving (Peterman and Dorner 2012; Riddell et al. 2013; Bendriem et al. 2019; COSEWIC 2019), and has repeatedly been a cause for concern among scientists, nongovernmental organisations, Indigenous groups, and even government bodies (Proboszcz 2018; Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans 2021a). …
… for some, the close relationships between members of the salmon aquaculture industry and DFO personnel raise concerns that these standards of impartiality are not being met. For example, the former Director of DFO’s Aquaculture, Biotechnology, and Aquatic Animal Health Science Branch was previously the President of the Aquaculture Association of Canada (Supplementary data, pp. 80–82), an organisation with the objective to “promote, support, and encourage… [the] advancement of aquaculture in Canada” (Supplementary data, p. 83). Similarly, the former Director of the Pacific Biological Station and Head of Aquaculture for DFO later served as Chair of the Science Advisory Council for the BC Salmon Farmers Association, by which he was described as “a strong advocate for the aquaculture industry in BC” (Supplementary data, pp. 84–85). These are just two examples among many. …
…
DFO’s accountability to industry was once again brought to light in 2022 when a prominent DFO research scientist testified in front of a parliamentary committee that DFO’s ability to conduct robust, transparent evidence-based risk assessments on aquaculture–wild interactions was compromised by a lack of independence from industry (Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans 2021b). Examples of the Department’s processes for developing salmon-farm regulations, while not examples of science advice, further call industry influence into question. …
The case for improving fisheries-science advice in Canada has never been stronger. DFO’s standard of fisheries-science advice now lags behind international best practice (Hutchings et al. 2012b; Winter and Hutchings 2020) as well as Canada’s own science advisory bodies, such as COSEWIC and the NACI, which strive to offer advice unfiltered and unaffected by political or bureaucratic influences. Yet DFO continues to allow industry lobbying and other non-science influences to interfere with advice processes (see Impartial section) while publicly claiming that the resulting advice is based on science (Supplementary data, pp. 10–15). …
This paper is open access and because I don’t ever before recall seeing an ‘Acknowledgements’ section that is sad, humorous, and touching, here it is,
Acknowledgements
We dedicate this paper to Jeffrey Hutchings, who tragically passed away halfway through the writing process. Jeff was a giant of the field who had an immense, positive influence on his friends and colleagues, and on fisheries science and policy in Canada and beyond. JH contributed to the conception and outline of the paper, wrote the first draft of the Introduction, edited as far as the “Background” subsection of the “Salmon Aquaculture Case Study,” discussed the case study examples, and penned a portion of the “Conclusions and Recommendations.” SG, AB, and GM all contributed equally to the manuscript (and reserve the right to list themselves as first author on their CVs). Published order of the co-first authors was determined via haphazard out-of-a-hat selection by AB’s 18-month-old son, Linden; whether this process bears all four hallmarks of robust science advice was not assessed. We are very grateful to 14 colleagues who provided valuable feedback during preparation and review.
“Graphene and Human Brain Project win biggest research award in history (& this is the 2000th post)” on January 28, 2013 was how I announced the results of what had been a a European Union (EU) competition that stretched out over several years and many stages as projects were evaluated and fell to the wayside or were allowed onto the next stage. The two finalists received €1B each to be paid out over ten years.
The EU-funded Human Brain Project (HBP) comes to an end in September and celebrates its successful conclusion today with a scientific symposium at Forschungszentrum Jülich (FZJ). The HBP was one of the first flagship projects and, with 155 cooperating institutions from 19 countries and a total budget of 607 million euros, one of the largest research projects in Europe. Forschungszentrum Jülich, with its world-leading brain research institute and the Jülich Supercomputing Centre, played an important role in the ten-year project.
“Understanding the complexity of the human brain and explaining its functionality are major challenges of brain research today”, says Astrid Lambrecht, Chair of the Board of Directors of Forschungszentrum Jülich. “The instruments of brain research have developed considerably in the last ten years. The Human Brain Project has been instrumental in driving this development – and not only gained new insights for brain research, but also provided important impulses for information technologies.”
HBP researchers have employed highly advanced methods from computing, neuroinformatics and artificial intelligence in a truly integrative approach to understanding the brain as a multi-level system. The project has contributed to a deeper understanding of the complex structure and function of the brain and enabled novel applications in medicine and technological advances.
Among the project’s highlight achievements are a three-dimensional, digital atlas of the human brain with unprecedented detail, personalised virtual models of patient brains with conditions like epilepsy and Parkinson’s, breakthroughs in the field of artificial intelligence, and an open digital research infrastructure – EBRAINS – that will remain an invaluable resource for the entire neuroscience community beyond the end of the HBP.
Researchers at the HBP have presented scientific results in over 3000 publications, as well as advanced medical and technical applications and over 160 freely accessible digital tools for neuroscience research.
“The Human Brain Project has a pioneering role for digital brain research with a unique interdisciplinary approach at the interface of neuroscience, computing and technology,” says Katrin Amunts, Director of the HBP and of the Institute for Neuroscience and Medicine at FZJ. “EBRAINS will continue to power this new way of investigating the brain and foster developments in brain medicine.”
“The impact of what you achieved in digital science goes beyond the neuroscientific community”, said Gustav Kalbe, CNECT, Acting Director of Digital Excellence and Science Infrastructures at the European Commission during the opening of the event. “The infrastructure that the Human Brain Project has established is already seen as a key building block to facilitate cooperation and research across geographical boundaries, but also across communities.”
As the “Google Maps of the brain” [emphasis mine], the Human Brain Project makes the most comprehensive digital brain atlas to date available to all researchers worldwide. The atlas by Jülich researchers and collaborators combines high-resolution data of neurons, fibre connections, receptors and functional specialisations in the brain, and is designed as a constantly growing system.
13 hospitals in France are currently testing the new “Virtual Epileptic Patient” – a platform developed at the University of Marseille [Aix-Marseille University?] in the Human Brain Project. It creates personalised simulation models of brain dynamics to provide surgeons with predictions for the success of different surgical treatment strategies. The approach was presented this year in the journals Science Translational Medicine and The Lancet Neurology.
SpiNNaker2 is a “neuromorphic” [brainlike] computer developed by the University of Manchester and TU Dresden within the Human Brain Project. The company SpiNNcloud Systems in Dresden is commercialising the approach for AI applications. (Image: Sprind.org)
As an openly accessible digital infrastructure, EBRAINS offers scientists easy access to the best techniques for complex research questions.
There was a Canadian connection at one time; Montréal Neuro at Canada’s McGill University was involved in developing a computational platform for neuroscience (CBRAIN) for HBP according to an announcement in my January 29, 2013 posting. However, there’s no mention of the EU project on the CBRAIN website nor is there mention of a Canadian partner on the EBRAINS website, which seemed the most likely successor to the CBRAIN portion of the HBP project originally mentioned in 2013.
I couldn’t resist “Google maps of the brain.”
In any event, the statement from Astrid Lambrecht offers an interesting contrast to that offered by the leader of the other project.
The flagship’s lead institution, Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden, issued an August 28, 2023 press release by Lisa Gahnertz (also on the Graphene Flagship website but published September 4, 2023) touting its achievement with an ebullience I am more accustomed to seeing in US news releases,
Chalmers steers Europe’s major graphene venture to success
For the past decade, the Graphene Flagship, the EU’s largest ever research programme, has been coordinated from Chalmers with Jari Kinaret at the helm. As the project reaches the ten-year mark, expectations have been realised, a strong European research field on graphene has been established, and the journey will continue.
‘Have we delivered what we promised?’ asks Graphene Flagship Director Jari Kinaret from his office in the physics department at Chalmers, overlooking the skyline of central Gothenburg.
‘Yes, we have delivered more than anyone had a right to expect,’ [emphasis mine] he says. ‘In our analysis for the conclusion of the project, we read the documents that were written at the start. What we promised then were over a hundred specific things. Some of them were scientific and technological promises, and they have all been fulfilled. Others were for specific applications, and here 60–70 per cent of what was promised has been delivered. We have also delivered applications we did not promise from the start, but these are more difficult to quantify.’
The autumn of 2013 saw the launch of the massive ten-year Science, Technology and Innovation research programme on graphene and other related two-dimensional materials. Joint funding from the European Commission and EU Member States totalled a staggering €1,000 million. A decade later, it is clear that the large-scale initiative has succeeded in its endeavours. According to a report by the research institute WifOR, the Graphene Flagship will have created a total contribution to GDP of €3,800 million and 38,400 new jobs in the 27 EU countries between 2014 and 2030.
Exceeded expectations
‘Per euro invested and compared to other EU projects, the flagship has performed 13 times better than expected in terms of patent applications, and seven times better for scientific publications. We have 17 spin-off companies that have received over €130 million in private funding – people investing their own money is a real example of trust in the fact that the technology works,’ says Jari Kinaret.
He emphasises that the long time span has been crucial in developing the concepts of the various flagship projects.
‘When it comes to new projects, the ability to work on a long timescale is a must and is more important than a large budget. It takes a long time to build trust, both in one another within a team and in the technology on the part of investors, industry and the wider community. The size of the project has also been significant. There has been an ecosystem around the material, with many graphene manufacturers and other organisations involved. It builds robustness, which means you have the courage to invest in the material and develop it.’
From lab to application
In 2010, Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov of the University of Manchester won the Nobel Prize in Physics for their pioneering experiments isolating the ultra-light and ultra-thin material graphene. It was the first known 2D material and stunned the world with its ‘exceptional properties originating in the strange world of quantum physics’ according to the Nobel Foundation’s press release. Many potential applications were identified for this electrically conductive, heat-resistant and light-transmitting material. Jari Kinaret’s research team had been exploring the material since 2006, and when Kinaret learned of the European Commission’s call for a ten-year research programme, it prompted him to submit an application. The Graphene Flagship was initiated to ensure that Europe would maintain its leading position in graphene research and innovation, and its coordination and administration fell to Chalmers.
Is it a staggering thought that your initiative became the biggest EU research project of all time?
‘The fact that the three-minute presentation I gave at a meeting in Brussels has grown into an activity in 22 countries, with 170 organisations and 1,300 people involved … You can’t think about things like that because it can easily become overwhelming. Sometimes you just have to go for it,’ says Jari Kinaret.
One of the objectives of the Graphene Flagship was to take the hopes for this material and move them from lab to application. What has happened so far?
‘We are well on track with 100 products priced and on their way to the market. Many of them are business-to-business products that are not something we ordinary consumers are going to buy, but which may affect us indirectly.’
‘It’s important to remember that getting products to the application stage is a complex process. For a researcher, it may take ten working prototypes; for industry, ten million. Everything has to click into place, on a large scale. All components must work identically and in exactly the same way, and be compatible with existing production in manufacturing as you cannot rebuild an entire factory for a new material. In short, it requires reliability, reproducibility and manufacturability.’
Applications in a wide range of areas
Graphene’s extraordinary properties are being used to deliver the next generation of technologies in a wide range of fields, such as sensors for self-driving cars, advanced batteries, new water purification methods and sophisticated instruments for use in neuroscience. When asked if there are any applications that Jani Kinaret himself would like to highlight, he mentions, among other things, the applications that are underway in the automotive industry – such as sensors to detect obstacles for self-driving cars. Thanks to graphene, they will be so cost-effective to produce that it will be possible to make them available in more than just the most expensive car models.
He also highlights the aerospace industry, where a graphene material for removing ice from aircraft and helicopter wings is under development for the Airbus company. Another favourite, which he has followed from basic research to application, is the development of an air cleaner for Lufthansa passenger aircraft, based on a kind of ‘graphene foam’. Because graphene foam is very light, it can be heated extremely quickly. A pulse of electricity lasting one thousandth of a second is enough to raise the temperature to 300 degrees, thus killing micro-organisms and effectively cleaning the air in the aircraft.
He also mentions the Swedish company ABB, which has developed a graphene composite for circuit breakers in switchgear. These circuit breakers are used to protect the electricity network and must be safe to use. The graphene composite replaces the manual lubrication of the circuit breakers, resulting in significant cost savings.
‘We also see graphene being used in medical technology, but its application requires many years of testing and approval by various bodies. For example, graphene technology can more effectively map the brain before neurosurgery, as it provides a more detailed image. Another aspect of graphene is that it is soft and pliable. This means it can be used for electrodes that are implanted in the brain to treat tremors in Parkinson’s patients, without the electrodes causing scarring,’ says Jari Kinaret.
Coordinated by Chalmers
Jari Kinaret sees the fact that the EU chose Chalmers as the coordinating university as a favourable factor for the Graphene Flagship.
‘Hundreds of millions of SEK [Swedish Kroner] have gone into Chalmers research, but what has perhaps been more important is that we have become well-known and visible in certain areas. We also have the 2D-Tech competence centre and the SIO Grafen programme, both funded by Vinnova and coordinated by Chalmers and Chalmers industriteknik respectively. I think it is excellent that Chalmers was selected, as there could have been too much focus on the coordinating organisation if it had been more firmly established in graphene research at the outset.’
What challenges have been encountered during the project?
‘With so many stakeholders involved, we are not always in agreement. But that is a good thing. A management book I once read said that if two parties always agree, then one is redundant. At the start of the project, it was also interesting to see the major cultural differences we had in our communications and that different cultures read different things between the lines; it took time to realise that we should be brutally straightforward in our communications with one another.’
What has it been like to have the coordinating role that you have had?
‘Obviously, I’ve had to worry about things an ordinary physics professor doesn’t have to worry about, like a phone call at four in the morning after the Brexit vote or helping various parties with intellectual property rights. I have read more legal contracts than I thought I would ever have to read as a professor. As a researcher, your approach when you go into a role is narrow and deep, here it was rather all about breadth. I would have liked to have both, but there are only 26 hours in a day,’ jokes Jari Kinaret.
New phase for the project and EU jobs to come
A new assignment now awaits Jari Kinaret outside Chalmers as Chief Executive Officer of the EU initiative KDT JU (Key Digital Technologies Joint Undertaking, soon to become Chips JU), where industry and the public sector interact to drive the development of new electronic components and systems.
The Graphene Flagship may have reached its destination in its current form, but the work started is progressing in a form more akin to a flotilla. About a dozen projects will continue to live on under the auspices of the European Commission’s Horizon Europe programme. Chalmers is going to coordinate a smaller CSA project called GrapheneEU, where CSA stands for ‘Coordination and Support Action’. It will act as a cohesive force between the research and innovation projects that make up the next phase of the flagship, offering them a range of support and services, including communication, innovation and standardisation.
The Graphene Flagship is about to turn ten. If the project had been a ten-year-old child, what kind of child would it have been?
‘It would have been a very diverse organism. Different aspirations are beginning to emerge – perhaps it is adolescence that is approaching. In addition, within the project we have also studied other related 2D materials, and we found that there are 6,000 distinct materials of this type, of which only about 100 have been studied. So, it’s the younger siblings that are starting to arrive now.’
Facts about the Graphene Flagship:
The Graphene Flagship is the first European flagship for future and emerging technologies. It has been coordinated and administered from the Department of Physics at Chalmers, and as the project enters its next phase, GrapheneEU, coordination will continue to be carried out by staff currently working on the flagship led by Chalmers Professor Patrik Johansson.
The project has proved highly successful in developing graphene-based technology in Europe, resulting in 17 new companies, around 100 new products, nearly 500 patent applications and thousands of scientific papers. All in all, the project has exceeded the EU’s targets for utilisation from research projects by a factor of ten. According to the assessment of the EU research programme Horizon 2020, Chalmers’ coordination of the flagship has been identified as one of the key factors behind its success.
Graphene Week will be held at the Svenska Mässan in Gothenburg from 4 to 8 September 2023. Graphene Week is an international conference, which also marks the finale of the ten-year anniversary of the Graphene Flagship. The conference will be jointly led by academia and industry – Professor Patrik Johansson from Chalmers and Dr Anna Andersson from ABB – and is expected to attract over 400 researchers from Sweden, Europe and the rest of the world. The programme includes an exhibition, press conference and media activities, special sessions on innovation, diversity and ethics, and several technical sessions. The full programme is available here.
Ten years and €1B each. Congratulations to the organizers on such massive undertakings. As for whether or not (and how they’ve been successful), I imagine time will tell.
I almost missed the briefing but the folks at the US National Science Foundation (NSF) kindly allowed me to join the meeting despite being 10 minutes late. Before launching into my comments, here’s what we were discussing,
From a September 20, 2023 NSF media briefing (received via email),
U. S. National Science Foundation Media Briefing on the Inaugural Global Centers Awards
Please join the U.S. National Science Foundation this Wednesday September 20th from 12:30 – 1:30 p.m. ESTfor a discussion and Q&A on the inaugural Global Centers Competition awards. Earlier this week, NSF along with partner funding agencies from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom — announced awards totaling $76.4 million for the inaugural Global Centers Competition. These international, interdisciplinary collaborative research centers will apply best practices of broadening participation and community engagement to develop use-inspired research on climate change and clean energy. The centers will also create and promote opportunities for students and early-career researchers to gain education and training in world-class research while enhancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.
NSF will have a panel of experts on hand to discuss and answer questions about these new Global Centers and how they will sync talent across the globe to generate the discoveries and solutions needed to empower resilient communities everywhere.
What: Panel discussion and Q&A on NSF’s Global Centers
When: 12:30 – 1:30 p.m. EST, Wednesday, September 20th, 2023
Where: This briefing [is over.]
Who: Scheduled panelists include…
Anne Emig is the Section Chief for the Programs and Analysis Section in the National Science Foundation Office of International Science and Engineering
Dr. Tanya Berger-Wolf is the Principal Investigator for the Global Centers Track 1 project on AI and Biodiversity Change as well as the Director of the Translational Data Analytics Institute and a Professor of Computer Science Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, as well as Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology at the Ohio State University
Dr. Meng Tao is the Principal Investigator for the Global Centers Track 1 project Global Hydrogen Production Technologies Center as well as a Professor, School of Electrical, Computer and Energy Engineering at Arizona State University
Dr. Ashish Sharma is the Principal Investigator for the Global Centers Track 1 project Clean Energy and Equitable Transportation Solutions as well as the Climate and Urban Sustainability Lead at the Discovery Partners Institute, University of Illinois System
Note: This briefing is only open to members of the media
I’m glad to have learned about this effort and applaud the NSF for its outreach efforts. By comparison, Canadian agencies (I’m looking at you, Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada [NSERC] and Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada [SSHRC]) have a lot to learn.
Today [September 18, 2023], the U.S. National Science Foundation — along with partner funding agencies from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom — announced awards totaling $76.4 million for the inaugural Global Centers Competition. These international, interdisciplinary collaborative research centers will apply best practices of broadening participation and community engagement to develop use-inspired research on climate change and clean energy. The centers will also create and promote opportunities for students and early-career researchers to gain education and training in world-class research while enhancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.
“NSF builds capacity and advances its priorities through these centers of research excellence by uniting diverse teams from around the world,” said NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan. “Global Centers will sync talent across the globe to generate the discoveries and solutions needed to empower resilient communities everywhere.”
Global Centers are sponsored in part by a multilateral funding activity led by NSF and four partner funding organizations: Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Canada’s Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), and the United Kingdom’s UK Research and Innovation (UKRI).
Both collectively and independently, the centers will support convergent interdisciplinary research collaborations focused on assessing and mitigating the impacts of climate change on society, people, and communities. Outcomes from Global Centers’ activities will inform and catalyze the development of innovative solutions and technologies to address climate change. Examples include: enhancing awareness of critical information; advancing and advocating for decarbonization efforts; creating climate change adaptation plans tailored to specific localities and groups; using artificial intelligence to study responses of nature to climate change; transboundary water issues; and scaling the production of next-generation technologies aimed at achieving net zero. Several projects include partnerships with tribal groups or historically Black colleges and universities that will broaden participation.
“The National Science Foundation Global Centres initiative provides students and researchers a platform to advance innovative and interdisciplinary research and gain education and training opportunities in world-class research while also enhancing diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility,” said NSERC President Alejandro Adem. “We at NSERC look forward to seeing the outcomes of the work being done by some of Canada and the world’s best and brightest minds to tackle one of the biggest issues of our time.”
The awards are divided into two tracks. Track 1 are Implementation grants with co-funding from international partners. Track 2 are Design grants meant to provide seed funding to develop the teams and the science for future competitions. Many additional countries are involved in Track 2 and will increase global engagement.
There are seven Track 1 Global Centers that involve research partnerships with Australia, Canada, and the U.K. Each Track 1 Global Center will be implemented by internationally dispersed teams consisting of U.S. and foreign researchers. U.S. researchers will be supported by NSF up to $5 million over four to five years, while foreign researchers will be supported by their respective country’s funding agency (CSIRO, NSERC, SSHRC and UKRI) with a comparable amount of funds.
There are 14 Track 2 Global Centers that are at the community-driven design stage. These centers’ teams involve U.S. researchers in partnerships with foreign researchers from any country. NSF will provide the U.S. researchers up to $250,000 of seed funding over a two-year period. These multidisciplinary, international teams will coordinate the research and education efforts needed to become competitive for Track-1 funding in the future.
“Our combined investment in Global Centers enables exciting researcher and innovation-led international and interdisciplinary collaboration to drive the energy transition,” said UKRI CEO, Dame Ottoline Leyser. “I look forward to seeing the creative solutions developed through these global collaborations.”
Kirsten Rose, Acting Chief Executive of CSIRO, said as Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO is proud to be part of a strong national contribution to solving this critical global challenge. “Partnering with the NSF’s Global Centers means Australia remains at the global forefront of work to build a clean hydrogen industry, build integrated and equitable energy systems, and partnering with regions and industries for a low emissions future.”
Track 1 (Implementation)
Global Hydrogen Production Technologies (HyPT) Center Grant number: 2330525 Arizona State University and U.S. partner institutions: University of Michigan, Stanford University and Navajo Technical University. Quadrilateral research partnership with Australia, Canada, and the U.K. Critical and Emerging Tech: green hydrogen (renewable energy generation).
Electric Power Innovation for a Carbon-free Society (EPICS) Grant number: 2330450 The Johns Hopkins University and U.S. partner institutions: Georgia Institute of Technology, University of California, Davis, and Resources for the Future. Trilateral research partnership with Australia and the U.K. Critical and Emerging Tech: renewable energy storage.
Global Nitrogen Innovation Center for Clean Energy and Environment (NICCEE) Grant number: 2330502 University of Maryland Center for Environmental Sciences and U.S. partner institutions: New York University and University of Massachusetts Amherst. Trilateral research partnership with Canada and the U.K. Critical & Emerging Tech: green ammonia (bioeconomy + agriculture).
Understanding Climate Change Impacts on Transboundary Waters Grant number: 2330317 University of Michigan and U.S. partner institutions: Cornell University, College of the Menominee Nation, Red Lake Nation and University of Wisconsin–Madison. Bilateral research partnership with Canada. Critical and Emerging Tech: N/A.
AI and Biodiversity Change (ABC) Grant number: 2330423 The Ohio State University and U.S. partner institutions: University of Pittsburgh and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Bilateral Research partnership with Canada. Critical and Emerging Tech: AI.
U.S.-Canada Center on Climate-Resilient Western Interconnected Grid Grant number: 2330582 The University of Utah and U.S. partner institutions: University of California San Diego, The University of New Mexico, and The Nevada System of Higher Education. Bilateral Research partnership with Canada. Critical and Emerging Tech: AI.
Clean Energy and Equitable Transportation Solutions Grant number: 2330565 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and U.S. partner institutions: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and Arizona State University. Bilateral Research partnership with the U.K. Critical and Emerging Tech: N/A
Track 2 (Design)
Developing Solutions to Decarbonize Emissions and Fuels Grant number: 2330509 University of Maryland, College Park. International collaboration with Japan, Israel, and Ghana.
Enhanced Wind Turbine Blade Durability Grant number: 2329911 Cornell University. International collaboration with Canada, the UK, Norway, Denmark, and Spain.
Building the Global Center for Forecasting Freshwater Futures Grant number: 2330211 Virginia Tech. International collaboration with Australia.
Climate Risk and Resilience: Southeast Asia as a Living Lab (SEALL) Grant number: 2330308 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. International collaboration with Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, and India.
Climate-Smart Food-Energy-Water Nexus in Small Farms Grant number: 2330505 The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture. International collaboration with Argentina, Brazil, Guatemala, Panama, Cambodia, and Uganda.
Center for Household Energy and Thermal Resilience (HEaTR) Grant number: 2330533 Cornell University. International collaboration with India, the U.K, Ghana, and Singapore.
Enabling interdisciplinary wildfire research for community resilience Grant number: 2330343 Oregon State University. International collaborations with Australia and the U.K.
SuReMin: Sustainable, resilient, responsible global minerals supply chain Grant number: 2330041 Northwestern University. International collaboration with Chile.
Nature-based Urban Hydrology Center Grant number: 2330413 Villanova University. International collaboration with Canada, the U.K, Switzerland, Ireland, Australia, Chile, and Turkey.
A multi-disciplinary framework to combat climate-induced desert locust upsurges, outbreaks, and plagues in East Africa Grand number: 2330452 Georgia State University. International collaboration with Ethiopia.
US-Africa Research Center for Clean Energy Grant number: 2330437 Georgia Institute of Technology. International collaborations with Rwanda.
Equitable and User-Centric Energy Market for Resilient Grid-interactive Communities Grant number: 2330504 Santa Clara University. International collaboration with Canada.
Energy Sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples (ESIP) Grant number: 2330387 University of North Dakota. International collaboration with Canada.
Blue Climate Solutions Grant number: 2330518 University of Rhode Island. International collaboration with Indonesia.
For Canadian researchers who are interested, there’s a National Science Foundation Global Centres webpage on the NSERC website, which answers a lot of questions about the programme from a Canadian perspective. The application deadline for both tracks was May 10, 2023 and there’s no information (as of September 20, 2023) about future competitions. Nice to see the social science and humanities included in the form of a funding agency. (I think this might be the one compliment I deliver to a Canadian funding initiative this year. 🙂
News about local and international affairs (see Seth Borenstein’s September 20, 2023 Associated Press article “UN chief warns of ‘gates of hell’ in climate summit, but carbon polluting nations stay silent”) and one’s own personal experience with climate issues can be discouraging at times so it’s heartening to see these efforts. Kudos to the organizers of the Global Centers programme and I wish all the researchers success.
Given how new these centers are, it’s understandable that the panelists would be a little fuzzy about specific although they’ve clearly considered and are attempting to address issues such as sharing data, trust, and outreach to various stakeholders and communities.
I wish I’d asked about cybersecurity when they were talking about data. Ah well, there was my question about outreach to people over the age of 50 or 55 as so much of their planning was focused on youth. The panelists who responded (Dr. Tanya Berger-Wolf, Dr. Meng Tao, and Dr. Ashish Sharma) did not seem to have done much thinking about seniors/elders/older people.
I believe bird watching (as mentioned by one of the panelists) does tend to attract older people but citizen science or other hobbies/programmes mentioned may or may not be a good source for seniors outreach. Almost all science outreach tilts to youth including citizen science.
With the planet is not doing so well and with the aging populations in Canada, the US, many European countries, China, Japan, and I’m sure many others perhaps some new thinking about ‘inclusivity’ might be in order. One suggestion, start thinking about age groups. In the same way that 20 is not 30, is not 40, so 55 is not 65, is not 75. One more thing, perhaps take into account life experience. Something that gets forgotten is that a lot of the programmes that people take for granted and a lot of the technology people use today was developed in the 1960s (e.g. Internet). That old person? Maybe it’s someone who founded the UN’s Environment Program (I was teaching a nanotechnology course in a seniors programme and asked students about themselves; I was intimidated by her credentials).
In the end, this Global Center initiative is heartening news.
It’s hard to tell how many students and staff participated in yesterday’s (May 1, 2023) Canada-wide walkout. The University of British Columbia (UBC) counted 300 in their walkout (from a May 1, 2023 article by Amir Ali for The Daily Hive). The total number is not available but there is a Nationwide Walkout page on the Support Our Science website with a list of over 30 participating institutions.
I didn’t pay much attention to the concerns from the academic community about the lack of support for Canadian research in my April 24, 2023 posting “The 2023 Canadian federal budget: science & technology of the military and cybersecurity and some closing comments (2 of 2)”; see the”Always a little disappointment” subhead featuring excerpts from a Universities Canada response and Federation for Humanities and Social Sciences briefing on the 2023 federal budget.
Thankfully, others have filled in the gap. Brian Owens wrote an April 28, 2023 article for Nature about the then proposed walkout and the reasons for it, Note: Links have been removed,
…
“Pay for grad students hasn’t increased in 20 years, while there has been 50% inflation over the same period,” says Sarah Laframboise, a biochemistry PhD student at the University of Ottawa and executive director of Support Our Science, a student-led campaign group that is organizing the walkout.
Scholarships from the federal government provide an annual stipend of Can$17,500 (US$12,800) for master’s degree students, either $23,000 or $35,000 for PhD students, and $45,000 for postdoctoral fellowships. That leaves many researchers in a precarious financial position, says Laframboise. A survey that she and her colleagues conducted of more than 1,000 Canadian graduate students found that almost half of respondents either frequently struggled to make ends meet or were forced to make sacrifices to afford necessities, and 30% had considered leaving their studies because of financial hardship1.
…
Support our Science has three main demands. First, it wants master’s scholarships to increase in value to $25,900 (a rise of 48%), postdoctoral fellowships to increase to $59,200, and the two levels of PhD scholarship to be equalized at $35,000. Second, it wants a 50% increase in the number of scholarships funded each year, and a doubling in the number of fellowships. Finally, it wants the size of federal research grants to increase by 50%, to allow professors to increase pay for students and postdocs who do not have a federal scholarship. The organization says that these demands are in line with recommendations from the government’s own advisory panel on the research-support system, which published its report in March [2023].
Support Our Science (SOS) has worked tirelessly over the last year to advocate for increased funding to graduate students and postdoctoral scholars. We are disappointed that the Government of Canada’s Budget 2023 does not include any new investments for the next generation of research and innovation leaders driving Canada’s economy. We recognize the fiscal challenges our nation is currently facing; however, Budget 2023 will have drastic impacts on current graduate and postdoctoral scholars in Canada and will negatively impact the retention and attraction of top talent for years to come.
…
Of the G7 nations, Canada already makes among the lowest investments in research, development and training. This is documented in the report by the Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System, the 2017 Fundamental Science Review, and the 2021 Degrees of Success Report by the Canadian Council of Academies. This budget puts Canada even further behind. Our ability to advance green technologies, cybersecurity, quantum technologies, disease prevention, and many other areas of critical and urgent need are being hampered by the Government of Canada’s lack of investment in the next generation of researchers.
…
A May 1, 2023 article (with files from Mike Crawley, Joel Ballard and Maurice Katz) on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC) news website details some of the hardships faced by graduate and postgraduate students, Note: Links have been removed,
…
A Canada graduate scholarship from one of the three federal research funding agencies is $17,500 per year for a master’s student or $21,000 per year for a doctoral student.
…
Luis Ramirez, a master’s student at Simon Fraser University (SFU), says the amount he is afforded is barely enough to cover his rent, tuition and food.
“We’re getting less than $30,000 [per year], even the PhD students.
“We have to pay rent, we have to pay tuition, and we have to pay groceries and clothing and so on. So it’s almost impossible to continue with this. We are on the poverty line right now.”
UBC graduate student Katrina Bergmann says the low scholarship amounts are “unacceptable.”
“We are the major workforce for Canadian science and innovation,” she said.
…
Nancy Forde, a professor at SFU, said federal funding is not meant to make anyone rich but is instead there to ensure researchers can focus on their work without worrying about finances.
But, she says no one can survive on the amount provided in these scholarship funds, adding that many are using food banks [emphasis mine] to get by.
“I have students in my own research group who are leaving research because they can’t afford to live,” she said. “They came into the program with savings, and they’ve depleted their savings.”
“Only the privileged can survive.”
…
In December [2022], Champagne [François-Philippe Champagne, the minister of science, innovation and industry] said he was aware of the call for more funding for graduate researchers and that it would be part of discussions with the finance minister.
“It’s clear that if we want to own the podium, we need to do more to support the researchers, the students and the scientists,” Champagne said.
…
In a statement, a spokesperson for the federal Science Ministry said it had provided $114 million over five years in the 2019 budget to granting agencies to create 500 master’s scholarships every year, in addition to an $813.6 million increase to student grants in the most recent budget.
The spokesperson did not specifically respond to a question about whether the scholarship amounts would increase. [emphases mins]
It seems students are not the only ones using food banks, from an April 23, 2023 article “UBC staff will no longer be able to access AMS Food Bank due to rising costs” by Nikitha Martins for The Daily Hive,
…
Kathleen Simpson is a Senior Manager at AMS [Alma Mater Society] and tells Daily Hive the student union’s decision to end support for UBC staff was not one it took lightly.
However, the rising cost of food has driven more people to need support from the AMS food bank and simultaneously made it more expensive to purchase food to operate the food bank.
Last year, the AMS food bank served 7,496 people. By the end of this policy year, the student union expects to help 15,861 people.
“In the last month alone, we saw a 1,000% spike over the previous month, quite unusual, but we are really facing some very high business numbers, and when you combine that with some of the costs of food that have been rising for some of our staple items,” Simpson explained.
…
AMS has put in a funding request to UBC for $350,000.
“Next year, our cost of groceries alone is projected to cost around $449,000,” Simpson said. “So we’re hoping to hear back… whether or not that full funding will be allocated.”
AMS is asking for nearly double what it received last year from UBC.
…
I wish them good luck in getting long overdue increases.For the curious, Support Our Science can be found here.
