Opinion argues Canada’s innovation gap is rooted in commercialization, citing university IP models

The Story

Elicia Maine, associate vice-president of knowledge mobilization and innovation at Simon Fraser University (SFU), and the W.J. VanDusen professor of innovation and entrepreneurship at SFU’s Beedie School of Business, argues that Canada’s innovation gap is primarily a commercialization problem rather than a lack of research capacity.

She says Canada has highly educated people and top-ranked universities producing world-class research and inventions, but too few breakthroughs become Canadian companies and industries that drive economic growth. Maine points to examples where inventions were commercialized outside Canada, including the insulin invention that led to Novo (formerly Novo Nordisk), now described as a $200 billion Danish company.

Maine says successive governments have tried to close the gap through research funding, research and development (R&D) tax credits, talent recruitment programs and innovation strategies. She also notes that she sees continued progress in areas such as quantum technologies, artificial intelligence, health sciences and clean energy, while describing the challenge of turning discoveries into globally competitive companies as persistent.

The opinion further links the issue to productivity, stating that Canada is in 18th place in an OECD ranking of productivity among OECD countries. It also says that the United States has created multinational AI companies that draw on Canadian research and inventions, and that Canadian companies can lag in adopting technology.

Maine attributes a broader economic framing to Prime Minister Mark Carney, saying that in response to U.S. tariffs he said, “We make our own weather,” and arguing that Canada should translate more invention into commercial value, including domestic innovation and globally exporting companies.

She says barriers to commercialization can include a lack of startup capital, uncertainty around intellectual property rights, limited pathways to commercialization, siloing in education, and longer timelines of STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) research.

Maine says Canadian universities generate valuable knowledge and intellectual property and highlights institutions including the University of Toronto, McGill and UBC, along with Simon Fraser University and the University of Waterloo. She says what SFU and Waterloo have in common is a “supportive, creator-owned IP policy” and a university culture oriented toward commercialization.

In the opinion, Maine describes SFU’s creator-owned IP policy as empowering and incentivizing researchers to pursue discoveries that translate into real-world products, services and ventures. She says the policy prioritizes the innovation ecosystem over financial returns to the institution, and includes mechanisms intended to support venture growth, such as mentorship, engagement, contract research and employing students.

Maine argues that giving inventors more agency can accelerate commercialization, attract investment and encourage partnerships that move ideas beyond the university. She says SFU provides examples of university research leading to companies in B.C., including Photonic Inc., Human in Motion Robotics Inc., Lungpacer Medical Inc. and Moment Energy Inc.

The opinion concludes that as governments focus on strengthening Canada’s economic sovereignty, diversifying trade and reducing vulnerability to external shocks, building more Canadian companies that develop, produce and export innovative products and services is essential. Maine says she believes researchers need pathways that make entrepreneurship easier, adding that the next NVIDIA, Samsung or Novo “doesn’t have to come from California, Seoul or Copenhagen.”