State of the Nation 2008

Figure 1: Research and Development Priority Areas and Sub-Priority Areas

The figure shows the four research priority areas: Environment, Natural Resources and Energy, Health and Life Sciences, and Information and Communications Technologies, then their subdivisions into the 13 sub-priority areas. Some of these are further sub-divided. Environment is sub-divided into Water — its health, energy and security implications — and cleaner methods of extracting, processing and utilizing hydrocarbon fuels, including reduced consumption. The Natural Resources and Energy priority's subdivisions are: Energy production in the oil sands; Arctic, with resource production, climate change adaptation and monitoring; and Biofuels, fuel cells and nuclear energy. The priority area of Health and Life Sciences is sub-divided into Regenerative medicine, Neuroscience, Health in an aging population, and Biomedical engineering and medical technologies. The fourth priority area, Information and Communications Technologies, is sub-divided into New media, animation and games; Wireless networks and services; Broadband networks; and Telecom equipment.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 2: National R&D Expenditure (GERD);
% Share of GDP (1996 and 2006)

This vertical bar graph compares gross domestic expenditure on research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product in 29 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries in 1996 and 2006. Canada's gross domestic expenditure on research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product was 1.65 percent in 1996 and had increased slightly to just under two percent in 2006. This ranked twelfth among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, directly ahead of Belgium, Australia and the United Kingdom, but behind Austria, Denmark, and France. Sweden had the highest gross domestic expenditure on research and development to gross domestic product percentage at about 3.3 percent in 1996 and around 3.7 percent in 2006, while Poland, and Mexico had close to the lowest figures, and the Slovak Republic had dropped from nearly one percent in 1996, to just 0.5 percent ten years later. The graph also shows the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average at 1.5 percent in 1996 and just under two percent in 2006. Canada is slightly above the OECD average in both years, but behind the average for G-7 countries.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 3: Gross Domestic Expenditures on R&D by Performing Sector, 1997-2007 (Constant 2002 Dollars)

This line graph shows the change in domestic expenditures on research and development over the ten year period from 1997 to 2007 by businesses, higher education, federal government and the provinces. The largest expenditures were by the business sector, starting at just under 10 billion in 1997, then peaking at close to 15 billion in 2001 and dropping off slightly to under 14 billion in 2002. The flowing five years shows a slight rise to over 14 billion, then a very slight decline back to the 14 billion level. The higher education sector starts off at about four billion, then shows a steady increase to just under nine billion in 2005, followed by a very small decline. Federal government expenditures start at just under two billion, increase marginally until 2000 when they remain steadily at the two billion level. The level for the provinces is only just above the zero mark, and remains so for the reporting period, varying between 160 million and 280 million.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 4: Major Flows of R&D Funding in Canada, 2006

This diagram shows the major flows of research and development funding in Canada in 2006, including sources and performance sectors. Business was by far the largest contributor at $14.23 billion, followed by the federal government at $5.23 billion and higher education at $4.43 billion. The remaining research and development funding came from foreign, provincial and private not-for-profit sources. In 2006, there was $28 billion in total research and development expenditures in Canada. Business performed $16.137 billion of this, while higher education performed $9.624 billion. Federal and provincial research and development accounted for the remainder.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 5: Sources of Business Sector Productivity Growth: Canada and the U.S.

This is a series of four bar graphs, Labour Productivity, Labour Composition, Capital Deepening and Multifactor Productivity. The first graph compares Canadian average annual labour productivity growth in three periods (1961-1980, 1980-1996, and 1996-2006) to the average annual growth in labour productivity in each of these periods in the United States. Canada's labour productivity growth rate in the first period was faster than that in the U.S.: Canada averaged nearly three percent annual labour productivity growth over this period compared to about 2.5 percent annual productivity growth in the U.S.. In the second period, average annual U.S. productivity growth was higher than Canada's: 1.8 percent versus 1.3 percent. In the third period, average annual U.S. productivity growth was again higher than Canada's: 2.9 percent versus 1.8 percent. The next three charts show the factors that contributed to this growth in labour productivity. In the first period, Canada's annual average labour productivity growth of 2.9 percent was composed of: 0.5 percent labour composition driven labour productivity growth; 1.6 percent capital deepening driven labour productivity growth; 0.7 percent multifactor productivity driven labour productivity growth. For the United States in the first period, the 2.5 percent labour productivity growth was driven by these same categories by 0.1 percent, 0.9 percent and 1.5 percent. For the second period, Canada's average annual labour productivity growth of 1.3 percent was composed of: 0.4 percent labour composition changes; 0.9 percent capital deepening; and zero percent multifactor productivity improvements. The 1.8 percent average annual labour productivity growth in the U.S. for this period was composed of contributions of 0.4 percent, 0.7 percent and 0.7 percent, respectively. For the last period, of the 1.83 percent average annual growth in labour productivity in Canada, 0.34 percent could be attributed to labour composition changes, 0.92 percent to capital deepening, and 0.58 percent multifactor productivity improvements. Of the 2.88 percent average annual labour productivity growth in the U.S. over this period, 0.36 percent could be attributed to labour composition; 1.02 percent to capital deepening; and 1.5 percent to multi-factor productivity growth.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 6: BERD Intensity by Country, 1996, 2001 and 2006

This vertical bar graph compares business enterprise expenditure on research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product in 37 countries in 1996, 2001 and 2006. Canada's business enterprise expenditure on research and development to gross domestic product ratio was under one percent in 1996, at 1.29 percent in 2001 and 1.06 percent in 2006. This ranked sixteenth, directly ahead of Australia, the Czech Republic, and China but behind the United Kingdom, Belgium and Luxembourg. Israel had the highest business enterprise expenditure on research and development to gross domestic product ratio among the countries listed at over 3.5 percent, while India had the lowest at about 0.25 percent.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 7: BERD Intensity Across OECD Countries, Adjusted for Variation in Industry Structure (2002)

In this vertical bar graph, business expenditure on research and development (BERD) as a share of GDP is shown for 19 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The BERD / GDP ratio (BERD intensity) is also shown after having been adjusted for industrial structure. This means that an average 'industrial structure' was found for all the countries, and the individual countries' BERD intensities in each industry were weighted by this average 'industrial structure'. Since some industries (such as the pharmaceutical industry or the ICT industries) are naturally highly BERD intensive, when the countries were 'weighted' by the average industrial structure, countries with high concentrations of these kinds of 'naturally' R&D intensive industries would show a downward adjustment in their national BERD intensity. After adjusting for industry structure, Canada's BERD intensity improves moderately. Sweden and Finland both show significant declines after adjusting for industry structure, indicating that both of these countries have a high concentration of industries which tend to have high R&D intensities around the world. However, even after adjustment, Sweden has the highest BERD intensity, indicating that Sweden's high BERD intensity is largely the result of high R&D investments by companies, and not just due to the presence of companies in highly R&D intensive industries.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 8: Direct and Indirect Government Funding of Business R&D and Tax Incentives for R&D (2005 or Latest Available Year)

This bar graph compares 13 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries for their direct and indirect government funding of business research and development, and for the cost of fiscal incentives in 2005. The totals are expressed as a percentage of gross domestic product. Canada had the third lowest direct government funding of business enterprise expenditure on research and development, at less than 0.02 percent. The United States had the largest proportion of direct government funding at close to 0.2 percent. By contrast, Canada is more reliant on indirect support than the other countries examined here. In 2005, Canada made the greatest use of tax incentives at more than 0.2 percent of gross domestic product.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 9: Investment in Machinery and Equipment, 2004

This horizontal bar graph shows the investment in machinery and equipment as a percentage share of Gross Domestic Product, for 18 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Belgium is at the top of the list with over 13 percent, followed by Greece, Italy and Japan. Canada, with just over six percent, ranks 13th, while the United States, Finland, France and Ireland are lowest with just under six percent.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 10: Venture Capital Relative to GDP (2007)

Eighteen countries are compared in this vertical bar chart with their venture capital investment as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product. The United Kingdom is at the top of the list, with just under 0.35 percent, with Greece at the other end of the scale with barely above the zero point. Canada comes seventh in this ranking, at 0.12 per cent.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 11: Firms Collaborating in Innovative Activities with Public and/or Private Partners by Size, 2001-04

A vertical bar chart ranking 26 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, shows Canada in 24th place in its percentage of firms collaborating in innovative practices. Comparing large firms, Belgium shows 60 percent, followed closely by Finland and Denmark, while Canada's percentage is just over 20 percent. Greece and Australia are the only countries with a lower percentage, at just under 20 percent. The percentage for small firms was under 20 for all countries ranging from 20 percent in Denmark, to about four percent in Italy.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 12: Firms Collaborating on Innovation with Higher Education Institutions, by Size, 2002-04

In this horizontal bar chart, 26 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries are compared by the percentage of firms — both small and medium enterprises, and large firms — collaborating on innovation with higher education institutions. Finland is at the top, with well over 50 percent of large firms and over ten percent of small and medium enterprises, followed by Sweden at almost 40 percent and eight percent, then Belgium with just over 30 percent and about eight percent respectively. Canada is near the bottom, with approximately 12 percent of large firms, but a relatively higher percentage of small and medium enterprises, followed by New Zealand, Greece and Australia.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 13: Firms Collaborating on Innovation with Government, by Size, 2002-04

In this horizontal bar chart, 26 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries are compared by the percentage of firms — both small and medium enterprises, and large firms — collaborating on innovation with Government. Finland is at the top, with about 45 percent of large firms and nearly ten percent of small and medium enterprises, followed by Norway with almost 30 percent and five percent, then Iceland with about 25 percent and about six percent respectively. Canada is near the bottom, with approximately five percent of large firms, followed by Australia and Greece.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 14: Higher Education Performance of R&D, 2006

This vertical bar graph compares higher education sector performance of research and development as a percentage of gross domestic product in 30 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries in 2006. Canada's higher education performance of research and development to relative to gross domestic product ratio was roughly 0.7 percent. This was second only to Sweden, which stood closer to 0.8 percent, but directly ahead of Switzerland, Austria, Finland and Denmark. The higher education expenditure on research and development to gross domestic product ratio of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development as a whole was just under 0.4 percent. Luxembourg had by far the lowest ratio of all countries examined.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 15: Canadian Specialization by Publication Field

This bar chart shows areas of Canadian specialisation in scientific research, measured by the concentration of Canadian scientific publications by area relative to world publications in these areas. By this measure, Canada is relatively specialised in earth and space sciences, biology, mathematics, biomedical research and clinical medicine.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 16: Average Relative Impact Factor by Field: Canadian Impact Relative to Average of OECD Countries

This bar chart shows areas of Canadian scientific strength, as measured by the average number of citations in each field received by Canadian papers relative to the average number of citations per paper in each field for the average of OECD countries. Canadian scientific papers in all fields listed are highly cited relative to the OECD average, with the exception of papers published in the field of mathematics. Canadian papers in the clinical medicine field are particularly highly cited relative to the OECD average.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 17: Share of All Business-Financed R&D that is Performed by the Higher Education Sector, avg. 2003-06

This vertical bar chart compares the share of all business-financed research and development that is performed by the higher education sector in 29 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. While Greece is shown on the chart to be top performer with close to 13 percent, there is a side note which states that Turkey is excluded from the chart with 35.1 percent. New Zealand and Canada, with 6 percent each, are in third and fourth position on the chart, above the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Average of four percent. At the lowest end of the scale are Japan, the Czech Republic and Luxembourg.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 18: Intramural Government R&D: Share of GDP in Canada and G-7

This line graph shows the share R&D performed by government labs in Canada as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product over a time period from 1997 to 2006. It is compared with the G-7 average for the same time period. The Canadian number drops slightly from 1997 to 1998, from 0.22 percent to 0.21 percent, then recovers to the previous level by 2000. A steady decline to 0.18 occurs until 2004, followed by an increase to 0.20 in 2005 and another drop the following year. The G-7 average starts at just over 0.28 percent in 1997, and gradually declines over the ten year period to about 0.24.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 19: PISA: Estimated Average Score and Confidence Intervals for Selected Countries, Combined Science, All Students, 2006

This chart shows the mean scores of students from the 30 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and Hong Kong in various scientific abilities. The mean score of Canada's students, at 534, put them in third position on the chart, behind only Finland and China (Hong Kong). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Average was 500. Fourteen countries were below the average, with Greece, Turkey and Mexico being at the bottom.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 20: Percentage of Population with Tertiary Education, Top 10 OECD Countries (2006)

This is a vertical bar graph comparing the percentage of the population with tertiary education in ten Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. College level, and University level percentages are shown. Canada has the highest overall percentage, with 47 percent. Half of that is made up of the college component. If only the University component is considered, Canada comes fourth in the chart after the United States, Norway and Denmark.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 21: Science and Engineering Degrees as a Percentage of New Degrees, Selected OECD Countries (2005)

This bar graph compares 26 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries for the percentage of all new degrees in 2005 that were science and engineering degrees. In terms of new engineering and science degrees combined, Canada ranked near the bottom along with New Zealand, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands and the United States. Korea is at the top of the list, at 37 percent, but its proportion of Engineering degrees is much higher than science, with just over 10 percent. Canada's proportions of science and engineering degrees are just about equal, but with slightly more science than engineering.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 22: Business Degrees Granted per 1000 Population, by Levels of Degrees (2003-04)

This vertical bar chart compares the number of business degrees per 1000 population granted in Canada and the United States. In total numbers, the United States shows 1.52, while Canada has 0.89. Canada granted 0.64 Bachelor's Degrees while the United States granted 1.04. With Master's Degrees, the numbers are 0.24 and 0.47 respectively.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 23: Ranking of Canada's Top MBA Schools, 2004, 2007 and 2008

This is a list of the six Canadian Masters of Business Administration schools, showing their world rankings in the years 2004, 2007 and 2008. In 2004, the University of Toronto was ranked 21st, followed closely by York University at 22nd. The University of Alberta was number 97. By 2007, the University of Toronto had dropped to 27th, and McGill University had gone from position 39 to 90. In 2008, most showed significant declines from 2004 with the University of Toronto at 40th. The University of Alberta's rank increased from 97th in 2004 to 88th in 2008.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 24: PhD Graduates per Million Population, Top 20 OECD Countries

This bar graph compares 20 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries for the number of doctoral graduates in science, engineering and other fields in 2006. The rankings are expressed in terms of graduates per million population. Canada ranked last in overall doctoral graduates at about 142 per million people. Sweden ranked first at about 390 per million. The majority of Canadian doctoral degrees were in fields other than science and engineering.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 25: Total R&D Personnel per Thousand Employment, Selected OECD Countries (2004)

The numbers of research and development personnel, as expressed in a number per thousand people employed, are compared amongst 17 Economic Co-operation and Development countries in this vertical bar graph. Canada ranks 12th, with between 12 and 13, while Finland with just under 25 is at the top end, and the United Kingdom at 10 is lowest.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 26: Trends in International Education Market Shares

This bar graph shows the share of all international students studying in each of 25 selected countries, and shows the change from 2000 to 2006. The biggest change is shown by the United States, which dropped from just under 25 percent in 2000, to under 20 percent. Canada, in sixth place grew only from 5 percent to 5.1 percent. Portugal, Hungary, Norway and Ireland showed virtually no growth from their levels of barely one percent. The United States was the top destination for international students in 2006, with nearly 20 percent of all international students studying in that country.

Return to the previous page.

Figure 27: Country of Origin of Visa Students in Canada

This line graph covers the years from 1976 to 2004, and shows the numbers of visa students in full-time enrolment, from China, the United States, France, India and Malaysia studying in Canada. The United States started with the highest number, at just over 4000, dropped in the mid 1980s, but by 2004 was in second place to China at just over 7000. The number from China was close to zero in 1976, rose to about 3500 in 1990, dropped over the next few years, but from 1998 to 2004, jumped from close to 1700, to 14 577 in 2004. The only country showing a significant decline in numbers, was Malaysia which had peaked at 5000 in 1983, but by 2004 was down to just over 500.

Return to the previous page.