EOLC Innovation Sub Committee Meeting - 13 Jun 2024 - Agenda

Published June 13, 2024

Word Count 49713 words

Reading Time 234 min read

Body: EOLC Type: Agenda Meeting: Committee Date: June 13, 2024 Collection: Council Agendas Municipality: Frontenac County

[View Document (PDF)](/docs/frontenac-county/PDF Documents/EOLC Monthly Meeting/2024/EOLC Innovation Sub Committee Meeting - 13 Jun 2024 - Agenda.pdf)

Document Text

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council Innovation Sub Committee Agenda Thursday, June 13, 2024 – 11:00 a.m. Via Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84282134860? pwd=vPQPi5V9Hnb2bJNawmEwaQryrMGXVS.1

Agenda Page 1.

Call to Order/Welcome - Sheridan Graham

Declaration of Conflict of Interest

Adoption of the Agenda

Election of Vice-Chair

Election of Chair

Terms of Reference - Review and Update a)

Innovation Ecosystem Report - Kathy Wood a)

Circular Procurement Presentation - Jodi Houston, Circular Innovation a)

EORN Digital Strategy a)

Bloomberg Spark – Igniting Public-Sector Innovation – Craig Desjardins

3 - 19

20 - 131

132 - 135

136 - 192

 

Bloomberg Philanthropies (list-manage.com) Home - Cities Today (cities-today.com)

Other Items for Discussion

Date of the Next Meeting TBD

Page 13.

Adjournment

Page 2 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Terms of Reference Technology Integration & Innovation Working Group

General Purposes • To serve as a catalyst and to provide leadership in implementation of the actions identified in the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy or other actions that achieve the same ends. • To develop, prioritize, advise and recommend actions to the Eastern Ontario Leadership Council related to improvements to the Eastern Ontario region’s development and utilization of technology, and innovative approaches to both public and private sector activity, that stimulate entrepreneurship, the creation and growth of businesses, improve the cost-effectiveness of production and service delivery, strengthen the economy, improve the financial circumstances of the region’s residents as well as its private and public organizations. • To work collaboratively to identify partners and other resources required to implement recommended actions, and provide leadership in the preparation of business cases and/or funding/financing applications to support implementation.
Scope of Working Group Assignment • Subject to the Working Group’s deliberations, the scope of Working Group activity may include: o Short or long-term actions listed under the Technology Integration and Innovation Theme of the Regional Economic Development Strategy o Innovation related to products, services, business models, financing, marketing or other business functions. For the purposes of the Working Group, “innovation” goes beyond new or improved technology. o Programs, services, facilities or events that support or assist entrepreneurs and innovators, start-ups and SMEs. These could include access to R&D and prototyping services, financing, advice/mentoring, or introduction of innovation into an existing enterprise. o Region-wide technology infrastructure that will serve as a springboard for organizations to use in establishing and growing their businesses or delivering services in new ways. Examples include access to Magnet (for human resources purposes), the existing Eastern Ontario Regional Network, cell/mobile broadband, or sector-focused applications for either private or public sector use. Note that neither the EOLC, the Working Group or any of its members need own or operate these technologies. o Data and/or analysis related to the operation of the region’s innovation system, the relative strength of its entrepreneurial nature, ability to generate

Page 1 of 17

Page 3 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

innovations of all types, business formation, the regional ‘stock’ of intellectual property, and the growth and development of the regional economy and the organizations that comprise it. All of this data and analysis is in support of evaluating opportunities or supporting the development of business cases for same. The Working Group’s assignment does not include: o Matters related to skills development, education and training, availability of employment in particular communities or across the region. However, this Working Group may solicit assistance from or collaborate with the EOLC Workforce Development and Deployment Working Group (or other similar groups beyond the EOLC) to understand, recommend or develop innovation or technology solutions deemed to be important to the development and deployment of the region’s workforce. o Matters related to the development and deployment of transportation systems, including infrastructure to support the efficient movement of goods, services and people across the region. However, this Working Group may solicit assistance from or collaborate with the EOLC Integrated, Intelligent Transportation System Working Group (or other similar groups beyond the EOLC) to understand, recommend and implement innovation or technology solutions deemed to be important to the development and operation of an integrated, intelligent transportation system. Generally, the rule of thumb would be that this Working Group is not the lead Group for any action shown in the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy as part of either the Workforce Development and Deployment Theme or the Integrated, Intelligent Transportation System Theme. However, nothing precludes this Working Group from approaching any other Working Group to discuss or work jointly on initiatives considered to have indirect significance for the Technology Integration & Innovation Working Group. 3. Background to Working Group Formation i. History of advocacy on region’s behalf: Both individual municipalities and regional bodies (e.g. EOWC, EOMC) have advocated to upper levels of government for greater consideration for the region’s technology infrastructure (e.g. broadband). The region has just witnessed the introduction of a broadband network known as the Eastern Ontario Regional Network, but the presence of other forms of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is variable (e.g. cell/mobile broadband). The EOLC has received the report from its first regional innovation-related initiative: Mapping the Innovation Ecosystem. There is a need for discussion and formulation of recommendations on how to prioritize the report’s recommendations and begin implementation. A number of stakeholder groups – from PELA CFDC and FedDev to post-secondary education institutions –

Page 2 of 17

Page 4 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

have undertaken initiatives that tie into regional innovation, entrepreneurship and technology development. In addition, an Eastern Ontario-wide Post Secondary Education Task Force has been formed, under the leadership of Carleton University, to leverage PSE assets in service to the economic development of the region. 4. Nature of region and its economy: As a region of rural communities and small towns & cities, Eastern Ontario has roughly a population of roughly 1.1 million distributed over a 50,000 square-kilometre area. In that area, there are approximately 32,400 employment locations plus another 65,000 indeterminate businesses/organizations. Of the 32,400 locations, 24,000 have fewer than 10 employees. Jobs in retail trade (62,700) health care & social assistance (61,000) and education (40,500) dominate the regional economy. Goods producing industries (agriculture, forestry and manufacturing) employ 67,000 with manufacturing alone accounting for 61,000 of the 440,000 jobs in the region. Roughly 14,600 of the region’s 440,000 jobs are in professional, scientific and technical services (NAIC 54). Some of the region’s small businesses – particularly family businesses – are likely included in the region’s 65,000 “indeterminate” employment location category because employment levels are harder to quantify. The dollar value of physical goods moving into, out of an around the region is currently unknown. In addition, Eastern Ontario communities ‘export’ roughly 87,600 members of their labour force to other communities in and outside the region each day. 5. Recent developments potentially affecting technology and innovation (in no particular order): i. Increasing reliance on technology in delivery of public and private services (e.g. education and training, emergency services, information services, remote sensing and systems controls) as well as a pervasive tool for personal communications ii. Technology and Associated Business Models — V2V, V2I, digital mapping and conditions reporting, electric vehicles; Uber iii. Trade deals (e.g. CETA, TPP, NAFTA) iv. First Nations’ interests in technology and economic development v. Federal and provincial innovation strategies, including consultations vi. Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy http://www.eowc.org/en/futuredirections/resources/WorkshopReportNovemb er21st2014.pdf vii. Completion of the Innovation Ecosystem Mapping Project (part of Strategy) viii. EORN Digital Strategy

Page 3 of 17

Page 5 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Expectations of Working Group • To identify, approach and engage individuals and stakeholder organizations with interest and a contribution to make to the general purposes of this Working Group. • To consider, articulate and share with the EOLC a general vision for technology and innovation in the region in support of the Vision articulated in the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy (see Appendix A) (e.g. what would a region characterized by technology integration and innovation look like?) • To evaluate the technology and innovation-related actions proposed in the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy as well as in other forums and reports, and to provide comment to the EOLC on the degree to which those actions address the challenges that the Working Group sees ahead in achieving its general vision. • To develop, prioritize, advise and recommend to the EOLC overall strategies, specific actions and/or next steps related to improvements to the Eastern Ontario region’s technology profile (assets, capabilities, utilization/deployment) and innovation system that will move the region toward achievement of its Vision, including but not limited to: o strengthening the region’s economy through the deployment of technology (all types), improved productivity, more business start-ups and growth, increased prevalence of innovative approaches to economic and social enterprise, and associated job creation o connecting the region’s people and organizations in support of regional/sectoral or other innovation networks (innovation ecosystem), value chain development, access to product and service R&D capabilities, as well as the services and resources needed to help entrepreneurs and innovators bring their ideas to market. o Encouraging local residents, organizations and newcomers to add to the region’s stock of intellectual property, commercialized innovations and deployments of technology in a variety of sectors. … all with an eye to regulatory compliance, stimulating inclusiveness, and maintained/improved quality of place across the region. • To work collaboratively to identify partners and other resources required to implement recommended actions • To provide leadership in the preparation of business cases and/or funding/financing applications to support implementation • To provide guidance and direction to the Working Group leadership (chair/cochairs) or staff/consulting resources retained to assist the Working Group • To report at least quarterly on the Working Group activities to the EOLC, and • To identify annually in advance, any financial or other resources that will be required to deliver on the preceding expectations.

Page 4 of 17

Page 6 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Ideas Already Tabled (starting with the Regional Strategy and EORN Digital Strategy, then in no particular order) A. Actions cited in the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy under the theme of “Technology Integration and Innovation”: • • • • • • • •

Map and profile Eastern Ontario’s Innovation Ecosystem (competitive advantage; retention & expansion of businesses; stimulating start-ups) Identify and address gaps Develop an online client/business pathways tool Leverage programming and support of the Ontario Network of Entrepreneurs (www.onebusiness.ca) and IRAP Host ‘Meeting of the Minds’ on digital fabrication; develop network of prototyping/fabrication labs and maker spaces in Eastern Ontario Obtain Eastern Ontario business performance data from Statistics Canada Encourage industry associations to create a regional manufacturing innovation network New business models for agricultural sector

B. Recommendations from the Innovation Ecosystem Mapping Project Report: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k.

Share best practices and assets Look beyond incubating information and tech start-ups (for innovative ideas) Look for opportunities to strengthen food processing, ‘green’ technology Drive ICT-enabled innovation across sectors (e.g. natural resources, nuclear, tourism) Use value chain mapping to create added value in existing sectors Erode the ivory towers and access PSE assets Develop a strategy for succession planning (esp. SMEs and family businesses), including access to capital Align with strategy to develop and retain talent/leverage diversity Lobby for ‘made in Canada’ innovation strategy beyond Toronto-Waterloo corridor Develop stronger regional brand identity… go beyond definition as a part of Ontario 60/40 strategy: 40% focus on foresight (where world might be in 5 years… suggestive of demand/what is needed rather than just ‘cool stuff’; 60% on leveraging, exploiting/adding value to existing assets Work together and leverage region’s technology (BB) infrastructure.

C. Eastern Ontario Digital Strategy: •

•

Focused on three goals: • Increasing user uptake of digital technologies • Improving broadband access • Demonstrating technology leadership … using three approaches: advocacy, strategic investment, and mobilization of diverse groups of stakeholders. Targets four arenas of action:

Page 5 of 17

Page 7 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

•

Draft as at May 24, 2017

• Regional economic development • Municipal services • Broadband education • Infrastructure (fixed and mobile) Intends to evaluate performance based on a) financial results, b) stakeholder perspectives, c) operational effectiveness and d) contribution to fulfilment of corporate mission.

D. Actions that have already been taken, not all as a direct result of the EOLC • Innovation Ecosystem Mapping Project (and report) complete o Successful launch event and panel discussion in conjunction with OEMC • Ontario East value chain mapping/3D mapping under way • New federal (business-focused) funding announcement via EO CFDC Network Inc. • ‘Signs of success’ from PEC IT-focused incubator; includes linkage to FirstStone Capital (Toronto) • Maker space in Lennox and Addington County with CFDC support • Eight high-potential IT-focused start-ups chosen for support through GrindspaceXL – Kingston/ Queen’s accelerator (an initiative with Invest Ottawa) • Magnet-Manufacturing Association initiative to extend training resources to region’s manufacturers undertaken with EODP support; successful in provision of training; significant job creation • EORN pursuing cell/mobile broadband gap project; implications for emergency services/first responders as well as business • EORN has produced an e-toolkit to help small organizations introduce digital technologies into their business. 8. Governance and Proposed Membership This Working Group is one of three contemplated by the EOLC, with each one corresponding to a theme from the Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy. The EOLC: • Provides overall strategic direction and monitors progress in enhancing the economic development of the region • Engages upper levels of government in broad discussions regarding economic development issues and funding opportunities that might be available to support Regional Economic Development Strategy implementation • Funds coordination support for the EOLC and the three Working Groups, • Supports research and analysis that is of value to the EOLC in its strategic role as well as to one or more of the Working Groups • Supports communications/awareness activities for the work of the EOLC and its Working Groups

Page 6 of 17

Page 8 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Recommendations for specific actions are considered by the Working Groups and brought to the EOLC for consideration of strategic fit and support in finding resources. Project development, engagement of stakeholders, preparation of funding/financing applications, and implementation of theme-focused projects would take place through the Working Groups. Any action or project that seeks financial or other support from the EOLC, or is to be undertaken in the EOLC’s name, requires the EOLC’s prior approval. However, a stakeholder organization may decide to take on, fund and manage a specific action or project on its own; in such cases, stakeholders are invited to keep the EOLC informed so as to prevent confusion or duplication of effort but formal approval is not required.

Working Groups are expected to follow good governance practices with respect to application of rules of order, declaration of conflicts of interest, documenting the outcomes of meetings or discussions, due diligence, transparency and accountability. The EOLC itself is a membership-based organization with representation from the Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC), the Eastern Ontario Mayors’ Caucus (EOMC), the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN), the Ontario East Economic Development Commission (Ontario East), and the Eastern Ontario CFDC Network (EOCFDC). Each organization designates its representatives to serve on the Council; those representatives are expected to serve as an information conduit between their members and the EOLC. This role is to be supported by an EOLC Communications Plan. Member organizations in the EOLC may nominate representatives to serve as members of the Working Group, based on interest, expertise or ability to contribute to the Working Group activities. The Chair or Co-Chairs may be nominated from these representatives but may also be from any of the other organizations represented at the Working Group.

Page 7 of 17

Page 9 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Decision-making: Each Working Group is expected to have a volunteer Chair (or Co-Chairs) with modest paid staff support through the EOLC. The Chair/Co-Chairs are expected to call Working Group meetings, chair the meetings and discussions, coordinate follow-up actions, ensure that the EOLC receives regular reports from the Working Group, and make any formal requests to the EOLC for support or engagement on any of the Working Group recommendations and prioritized actions. Decision-making at the Working Group level is expected to be by consensus, defined as 80% support from those participating in the meeting. Working Groups are expected to meet at least quarterly; timing and frequency of meetings (in-person or teleconference) will be at the discretion of the Working Groups themselves. Membership: The Chair/Co-Chairs will ensure that a list of Working Group members is maintained, and direct the Working Group’s attention to adjusting membership as required (e.g. to bring in specific expertise or to replace ‘retiring’ members). The Working Group has the power to add new members as required to address its mandate and execute tasks. All Working Group members serve in a volunteer capacity. Organizations that are candidates for inclusion in discussions about any technology or innovation-related actions or projects include: • Upper, lower and single tier municipalities • First Nation communities • Public and private sector organizations providing services to entrepreneurs, innovators, start-ups and SMEs • Communities or organizations interested in serving as a pilot project/test site • Owners of physical or technology infrastructure assets, whether public or private • Organizations responsible for maintaining or regulating technology assets or services • Academic and other researchers working on technology development, innovation processes • Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science, and Ministry of Economic Development and Growth, Ontario Ministry of Small Business, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs • Ministry of Innovation, Science and Economic Development of Canada • CMC Microsystems • Federation of Canadian Municipalities and/or Association of Municipalities of Ontario • Private financial organizations and/or venture capital or angel investment groups • Cybersecurity firms • Firms or institutes with expertise in intellectual property and valuations • Consulting firms providing services to the start-up/SME business or innovation communities

Page 8 of 17

Page 10 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council •

• • • • • •

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Private firms, business/industry/sectoral associations or other organizations interested in stimulating innovation or the introduction of new technologies in either the public or private sectors Couriers, logistics and shipping companies Intensive users of innovation services or technology assets R&D intensive organizations whether in the public or private sector Software developers with applications that have high potential for application in Eastern Ontario Technology hardware firms, or Any other organization that the Working Group believes can add value to its work.

Page 9 of 17

Page 11 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Appendices: Appendix A:

Innovation-Related Content from Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy Vision 2024 for Eastern Ontario Economic Development Strategy (from the approved Strategy as presented on the EOWC website) “Eastern Ontario promotes business growth as the backbone of a sustainable regional economy. Our municipalities and counties use best practices to support this growth, and our region has earned a reputation as being progressive and innovative in our collaborations with the business community. We have built a culture of partnerships ith business, institutions and organizations to support the growth and development of our workforce, business communities, and entrepreneurs. Eastern Ontario will be known for its highly skilled workforce and strong work ethic combined with a strong and diverse regional economy. People of all ages will have economic opportunity and choices for exciting work and lifelong learning. The region’s economy is fueled by its world-class educational institutions and diverse and innovative business community, supported by an integrated and intelligent transportation system that enables the effective and efficient movement of goods, people and ideas across the region. Eastern Ontario will be a dynamic and prosperous place to live, work and play in harmony with the natural environment. The region’s vibrant rural and urban communities, steeped in tradition and rich in history, will continue to attract people and visitors seeking a high quality of place experience Growth of the region’s communities will respect and incorporate the area’s natural assets, ensuring a positive legacy for future generations.”

Page 10 of 17

Page 12 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Excerpts from Eastern Ontario Regional Economic Development Strategy Seven Major Themes Emerge from the Consultation Processes (page 17) The strategy’s consultation processes yielded seven major themes to which stakeholders believe that economic development leaders in the region must respond. These include: • • • • • • •

Providing the right infrastructure for business; Creating a stable and predictable business environment; Introducing a new regional approach to economic development; Delivering innovation services; Redoubling our efforts on workforce development and attraction; Re-inventing traditional sectors of the economy; and Accelerating the adoption of new technologies.

Page 18: “The need for integrating technology into the region’s economic sectors was raised by some as part of this theme (e.g. technology integration in education, manufacturing, agriculture, healthcare, tourism and retailing).” Page 20: “4) Delivering Innovation Services Ranked as a top priority in five of nine focus groups, this theme focuses on actions which will generate business and economic activity from the ground up, by supporting local entrepreneurs and enhancing linkages to innovation services to help businesses grow. •

•

There was a strong sense of greater need for entrepreneurship training and supports (e.g. mentors, advisory services). Some stakeholders noted opportunities for incubation services – particularly targeted toward start-ups and SMEs in specific sectors. This view was often accompanied by comments about the need to establish a business case for any incubator. Otherwise these facilities are not sustainable over the medium or longer term. Many concerns were raised about access to capital. It is not clear that stakeholders understand how to use new revenue generation tools (example: crowd funding) or how to be investment-ready for angel investors, venture capitalists or perhaps even conventional lenders. Some sector-based innovations are already taking place (e.g. regionally-branded products) and these are seen as good models or case studies that could benefit others moving in the same direction. Multiple stakeholders referred to the benefits of development and/or introduction of technology in most of the sectors of the regional economy – from new (digital) applications for online business to technologies embedded in other equipment (e.g. sensors, GIS etc.). There was a sense that there may be sectors in which Eastern Ontario could provide leadership and create economic development opportunities. There was a sense that the supply chains for specific industries/sub-sectors are not

Page 11 of 17

Page 13 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

well understood across the region. In particular, larger firms may not know about suppliers outside of their own municipality and smaller firms may not know about opportunities to become part of large firm supply chains – even those quite close to home. The use of technology to improve supply chain management and utilization of regional suppliers was seen as being worthy of pursuit. Page 22: 7) Accelerating the Adoption of New Technologies Ranked as a top priority in one of nine focus groups, this theme focuses on actions which would link together regional businesses, institutions and other stakeholders, as well as increasing economic transactions and trade. For many stakeholders, adoption of new technologies was focused on either availability of generic services (broadband, mobile communications) or related to a specific sector. •

•

Many stakeholders commented on the continuing need for better broadband and cellular services. However, many also acknowledged that the Eastern Ontario Regional Network was in mid-rollout and so availability might need to be reviewed after that process is complete at the end of 2014. Stakeholders also noted that capitalizing on the Network’s existence is required to deliver an economic development ROI from the investment in EORN. There was a sense in online survey results, as well as one-on-one/small group discussions that there are opportunities for economic growth by capitalizing on technology, including: • Application of industrial robotics and digital fabrication (e.g. 3-D printing); • Delivery of business education including entrepreneurship programs, online marketing or advanced manufacturing concepts (e.g. LEAN, JIT, supply chain management); • Some industry associations /networks see opportunity to leverage technology to build a regional food network (traceability, online ordering, transportation and logistics, farmers’ markets); and • Stakeholders recognized that there a shift to online sales channels in the retail sector that is both a threat to “bricks and mortar” retail operations and an opportunity (if local retailers understand how to market and sell online). There is a view that Eastern Ontario has sectoral expertise in one part of the region that could be leveraged – via broadband – to the benefit of other parts of the region (e.g. manufacturing, ICT/digital apps, local food etc.). Some stakeholders suggested that there is an opportunity to differentiate Eastern Ontario based on the concept of a “smart” region (rather than an individual community) and technologies. The focus of most comments was on actually becoming and marketing the attributes of a smart region rather than seeking any particular external designation as such.

Page 12 of 17

Page 14 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Priority: Technology Integration and Innovation Economically disruptive technologies—like the printing press in the Renaissance, or steam power in the Industrial Revolution or the semiconductor microchip and the Internet in today’s economy— have transformed the way we live and work, enabled new business models, and provided an opening for new players to upset the established order. In a 2013 report, McKinsey Global Institute identified 12 potentially disruptive technologies22 whose direct impact is near enough (10 years) to warrant consideration in the preparation of any economic development strategy. McKinsey has defined these as: • Mobile Internet – mobile computing devices and Internet connectivity • Automation of Knowledge Work – intelligent software systems • The Internet of Things – network of low costs sensors and actuators for data collection, monitoring, process optimization • Cloud Technology – use of computer hardware and software resources delivered over a network or Internet • Advanced Robotics – capable robots with enhanced senses, dexterity and intelligence • 3D Printing – an additive manufacturing technique to create objects by printing layers of material based on digital models • Advanced Materials – material designed with superior characteristics Autonomous and near • Autonomous Vehicles – vehicles that can navigate and operate with reduced or no human intervention • Next Generation Genomics – fast, low cost gene sequencing, advanced analytics • Energy Storage – devices or systems that store energy for later use • Advanced Oil and Gas Exploration and Recovery – techniques to make extraction of unconventional oil and gas economical • Renewable Energy – generation of electricity from renewable resources with reduced harmful effect. The rapid rate of integration of these technologies promises to further disrupt and transform the economy of Eastern Ontario from manufacturing to agriculture, retail to healthcare. There can be no doubt that technology and innovation will continue to shape the global economy and society as a whole over the coming decade. The only question is how and to what extent this shift will affect Eastern Ontario’s comparative advantage to attract and retain investment and talent in key sectors and the ability to grow and expand the region’s economy as a whole. It is also crucial to recognize that important technologies can come in any field or emerge from any scientific discipline. What they have in common is their ability to drive a high rate of change and the potential for disruptive economic impact – including the loss of existing jobs.

Page 13 of 17

Page 15 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

The decline of the Province’s and by extension Eastern Ontario’s manufacturing sector is illustrative of the impact that technology is having on the economy. While the sector has been greatly impacted by trade liberalization and an appreciating dollar, it is also well documented that Ontario manufacturers lag the peer states in machinery and equipment investment by a significant margin. This in turn has contributed to low productivity growth and rates of innovation, as reflected by spending in research and development. The result is an eroding of our competitive positioning and significant job losses across the sector. While business leaders recognize the importance of investment and innovation in improving productivity and gaining a competitive edge, they have failed to follow through on these activities.

Page 14 of 17

Page 16 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Page 15 of 17

Page 17 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Appendix B: Potential Technology or Innovation-Related Projects Suggested to the Province of Ontario by the EOWC in its submission to the Moving Ontario Forward Outside the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area consultations. Name: Region-wide Next Generation ICT Project Description: Development and implementation of a multi-year program of ensuring comprehensive coverage of Eastern Ontario with mobile broadband/cellular access, filling in the (few) remaining gaps in fixed high-speed internet, and scaling up the existing network for citizens’ needs in 2024. The objective of the project is to ensure that the technical capacity is in place to support Information and Communications Technology (ICT) applications across multiple sectors. Led by the Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN), this project will ensure build on the recently completed high-speed internet network and a detailed gap analysis for mobile broadband/cellular service, to support EORN’s Digital Strategy. The Strategy is designed to ensure that ICT infrastructure is in place to support applications in sectors of strategic importance to the region: emergency services and home-based health services, municipal asset monitoring and deployment systems, tourism promotion and guidance systems, ICT safety and security applications, possible deployment of drones, VPN access for mobile workers, electronic records management, and citizen engagement. This project would be undertaken in conjunction with the Intelligent Transportation System Project. Fit with Province’s Aspirations: Addresses expressed goal of getting people (and goods) around “safely and efficiently”. Consistent with principles of Openness to Bold Solutions, and Adaptive and Responsive. Consistent with Next Generation Signature Investments. Fit with Regional Aspirations and Criteria: Supports implementation of EORN Digital Strategy (2014). Requires extensive inter-municipal collaborations, includes opportunity for public-private partnerships, supports significant support to local and regional economic development. Helps to make communities investment ready and attractive for business investment including Foreign Direct Investment. Formalizes the region’s commitment to remaining at the leading edge of rural broadband infrastructure and related participation in the digital society. Will draw upon EORN’s mobile broadband/cell service gap analysis. Strong implementation capacity exists at local and especially regional levels (via EORN). Anticipated collaboration with technology/service providers and sectoral organizations to add required domain expertise. Role Technology Plays: This project is technology-centred beginning with broadband/cellular service provision to support a wide range of technologies from online applications to technologies embedded in a wide range of products. Business Case/ROI Implications: Through EORN, EOWC has extensive experience with ICT projects and the importance of encouraging utilization, thus driving ROI. Multiple sectors can leverage ICT for improved productivity, service levels, and operational efficiencies. The project would help to brand Eastern Ontario as a “smart”, connected region. EORN would almost certainly lead this project.

Page 16 of 17

Page 18 of 192

Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Draft as at May 24, 2017

Name: Intelligent Transportation System Project Description: Development and implementation of a multi-year program of embedding Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in the transportation system of Eastern Ontario, enabling interactive exchange of transportation-related information between these assets (roads & bridges, signage, weather and road condition monitoring stations, maintenance and winter control vehicles etc.) and the travelling public and those responsible for ensuring safe, efficient transportation across the region. For a region-wide grid of arterial roads, this project would introduce a) pan-regional mobile broadband and/or cell service, b) road condition webcams and weather stations, c) signage and other methods of alerting travelers to the availability of information via (mobile) wireless communications (e.g. tourism information, roadside services), and d) eventual use of transportation assets for driverless vehicles or for energy generation. Emergency Services personnel would use ICT to deliver services to clients’ homes or communicate with specialized personnel via intensive data exchange. This project would be undertaken in conjunction with the Regional Highway Integration Project and the Commutershed Infrastructure Investment Project, both of which are presented separately. Fit with Province’s Aspirations: Addresses expressed goal of getting people (and goods) around “safely and efficiently”. Consistent with principles of Openness to Bold Solutions, and Adaptive and Responsive. Consistent with Additional Infrastructure Investments to Support Transportation, especially Next Generation Signature Investments. Fit with Regional Aspirations and Criteria: Supports implementation of Eastern Ontario Economic Development Strategy (2014), and EORN Digital Strategy (2014). Requires extensive collaborations (among rural and urban municipalities, with MTO), includes opportunity for publicprivate partnerships, supports significant support to local and regional economic development. Demonstrates region’s ability to deliver two of three most important considerations for Foreign Direct Investment (transportation, technology). Encourages municipalities to make strategic choices about transportation assets, high-traffic corridors, and provision of vital services in mobile mode. Helps to mitigate unintended consequences of EDR traffic. Will draw upon EORN’s mobile broadband/cell service gap analysis. Implementation capacity exists at local and especially regional levels (via EORN). Anticipated collaboration with MTO and technology/service providers will enhance access to required expertise. Role Technology Plays: ICT will add value to regional transportation system, increasing efficiency of travel/logistics, improving travellers’ experience in the region, and prepare the region for future developments in transportation. ICT will help transportation system managers monitor and respond to changing conditions, deploying available resources where they are needed most. Responsiveness of Emergency Services personnel will also be enhanced. Business Case/ROI Implications: Through EORN, EOWC has extensive experience with ICT projects as well as with conventional transportation systems (EOWC and EOMC). Strategic use of technology can help to overcome low population density and improve deployment of public services. The project would help to brand Eastern Ontario as a “smart”, connected region.

Page 17 of 17

Page 19 of 192

MAPPING THE INNOVATION ECOSYSTEM IN EASTERN ONTARIO TOWARDS AN INCLUSIVE CANADIAN INNOVATION STRATEGY

March 31, 2016

Page 20 of 192

Page 21 of 192

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES

LIST OF APPENDICES

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Overview Findings Recommendations Conclusions

BACKGROUND

The Purpose Of The Study Research Questions Methods

INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

Innovation In Smaller Communities Innovation Ecosystem Elements and Mapping Innovation Index Regional Data And Analysis

RECOMMENDATIONS AND FURTHER WORK

APPENDICES

Innovation Ecosystem Scorecard Regional Data And Analysis Elements Of The Eastern Ontario Innovation Ecosystem

REFERENCES

Page 22 of 192

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Innovation ecosystems

Figure 2: Diagram of EU Innovation Measures

Figure 3: Global Entrepreneurship: Monitor (GEM) Model

Figure 4: Innovation index measures

Figure 5: Strategic Doing Protocol

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Measures of Innovation – International Comparisons

Table 2 below shows some of the measures identified within existing literature to assess the impact of research.

Table 3: Assessments of Incubators

Table 4: Measuring the impact of entrepreneurship education programs

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1.1: Innovation Ecosystem Scorecard (Innovation in American Regions)

Appendix 1.2: Definitions of the Variables Used in the Computation of the Component Indexes of the Innovation Index (Indiana Business Research Center, 2009)

Appendix 2 Definitions of the Variables Used in the Computation of the Component Indexes of the Innovation Index (Indiana Business Research Center, 2009) continued

Appendix 2.1: Regional Data and Analysis Self-Employment in Eastern Ontario (2011, Household Survey)

Appendix 2.2: Economic Diversification Index (2011)

Appendix 2.3: Eastern Ontario degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time

Appendix 2.4: Eastern Ontario degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time (Zoomed in)

Appendix 2.5: Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time

Appendix 2.6: Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time (Zoomed in)

Appendix 2.7: Share of Workforce by Industry (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011)

Appendix 2.8: Share of Workforce by Industry, Eastern Ontario Only (2001 & 2011)

Appendix 2.9: Share of Workforce by Industry, Eastern Ontario Only - Minus Ottawa (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011)

Appendix 2.10: Share of Workforce by Industry, Eastern Ontario Only – Minus Ottawa (2001 & 2011)

Appendix 2.11: Share of Workforce by Occupation (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011)

Page 23 of 192

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 2.12: Share of Workforce by Occupation, Eastern Ontario Only (2001 & 2011)

Appendix 2.13: Share of Workforce by Occupation- Minus Ottawa (2001 & 2011)

Appendix 2.14: Share of Workforce by Occupation, Eastern Ontario - Minus Ottawa Only (2001 & 2011)

Appendix 2.15: Immigrant Status & Period

Appendix 2.16: Immigration Source Region

Appendix 2.17: Generation Status

Appendix 2.18: Aboriginal Identity

Appendix 2.19: Mobility

Appendix 2.20: Education Levels

Appendix 2.21: Industry Mix

Appendix 2.22: Occupational Mix

Appendix 2.23: Employment: Full-Time/Part-Time

Appendix 2.24: Employment Status: Full-Year/Part-Year

Appendix 2.25: Average Income

Appendix 2.25: New resumes posted (1Q 2016)

Appendix 2.26: New Resumes Posted by Location and Month (1Q 2016)

Appendix 2.27: New jobs posted (Q1 2016)

Appendix 2.28: New Jobs Posted by Location and Month

Appendix 2.29: New Jobs Posted by Industry

Appendix 2.30: New Jobs by Industry (1Q 2016)

Appendix 2.31: New Jobs (2016) & Existing Jobs (2011) by Industry

Appendix 2.32: New Jobs Posted by Occupation Group

Appendix 2.33: New Jobs (1Q 2016)

Appendix 2.34: New Jobs (2016) & Existing Jobs (2011)

Appendix 2.35: New Jobs by Education/Skill Required

Appendix 2.36: Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed

Appendix 2.37: Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed (not including “unknown”)

Appendix 2.38: New Jobs by Full-Time Status

Appendix 2.39: New Jobs (1Q 2016)

Appendix 2.40: New Jobs Unknown/Not Identified–excluded for comparison (1Q 2016)

Appendix 3.1: Elements of the Eastern Ontario Innovation Ecosystem

89 iii

Page 24 of 192

Page 25 of 192

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Wendy Cukier

MA, MBA, PhD, DU (hon) LLD (hon) M.S.C.

is a Professor of Information Technology Management at the Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University. Ser ving as Vice-President of Research and Innovation at Ryerson University from 2011 - 2016, Wendy led Ryerson University’s strategy to grow research and to promote innovation and commercialization. She is the author of Innovation Nation: From Java to Jurassic Park and has published extensively on technological and social innovation. She was the project lead and chair of the working group for the Ontario Centre for Workforce Innovation (OCWI) and is the founder of the Diversity Institute.

Kevin Stolarik

MBA, PhD, M Ed.

is a research associate and Adjunct Professor at Ryerson University, and an internationally recognized researcher and commentator. Previously, Kevin was the research director at the Mar tin Prosperity Institute where he led a range of large complex multidisciplinar y and multi-method projects.

Ojelanki Ngwenyama

PhD, D.Phil.

is Director of the Institute of Innovation and Technology Management, Professor of Global Management and Analytics in the Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University. His research focuses on information technology adoption and organizational innovation. He is the principal investigator for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) funded project: Accelerating Digital Technology Adoption in Canadian Companies.

Mohamed Elmi

PhD Candidate in Information Systems

is a PhD Candidate in Information Systems at University of Cape Town and a Junior Research Scientist with the Ted Rogers School of Management’s Institute for Innovation and Technology Management at Ryerson University. Mohamed’s doctoral research focuses on how Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) can fur ther economic and social development.

ABOUT IITM The strategic mission of Ted Rogers School of Management’s Institute for Innovation and Technology Management (IITM) at Ryerson University is to find innovative solutions to real-world technology management problems. IITM takes an interdisciplinar y, practice-oriented research and innovation that assists organizations and communities in maintaining agility and competitiveness. Presently, our research focuses on three broad themes:

Information technology management and organizational learning;
Developing organizational dynamic design capabilities; and
Information technologies, innovation and economic growth. This report was commissioned and supported by:

Page 26 of 192

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview

Innovation is “a process through which economic or social value is extracted from knowledge—by creating, diffusing, and transforming ideas—to produce new or improved products, ser vices, and processes.” (Conference Board of Canada, 2016). While much of the attention in Canada has focused on disruptive innovation – often driven by breakthrough technologies (eg. 3D printing or genomics), new products (eg. smar tphones) or ser vices (eg. Uber), incremental innovation is just as impor tant. Significant productivity gains can be achieved across sectors through the adoption and use (rather than creation) of new technologies or by imlementing improved processes or business models. (Conference Board of Canada, 2016). Moreover, while much attention has been focused on technology hubs, such as Silicon Valley in the USA or the Waterloo-Toronto nexus in Canada, innovation ecosystems in smaller communities and rural areas are also critical to driving economic growth (OECD, 2014). An inclusive strategy must also address oppor tunities for innovating in existing organizations across sectors including ser vice industries, agriculture, natural resources, tourism and recreation, government and public ser vices. 1

Page 27 of 192

This study aims at understanding the innovation ecosystem in Eastern Ontario in order to better understand how ser vices, suppor ts and local assets contribute to the creation of new businesses and investments and the retention and expansion of existing business. The study uses models of innovation systems, data on features of Eastern Ontario and key stakeholders to identify the components of the innovation system including: • Public and private sector research facilities and postsecondar y institutions • Star tups which may emerge from the commercialization of research, new business models, products or processes • Established businesses which develop and adopt new products, ser vices and processes • Funders, financial institutions and investors • The talent pool including newcomers to the region and people moving between organizations and sectors • Intermediaries such as incubators, accelerators, business advising ser vices etc. • Government agencies that have policies (including procurement) which may enable or constrain innovation • “Culture” – including beliefs regarding entrepreneurship.

Findings The critical assets identified in the Eastern Ontario innovation ecosystem are: • Technology infrastructure – access to broadband • Entrepreneurial culture - Higher percentage of self-employment (8.7%) than Ontario (7.6%) or Canada (8.1%) • Strong concentration of postsecondar y institutions per capita • World class research capacity • Pockets of wealth and access to capital • Proximity to major markets • Quality of life and recreational assets. The challenges in the Eastern Ontario ecosystem include: • Fragmentation of strategies, ser vices and suppor ts • Fuzzy brand and differentiation • Lack of population density and distances which impede networking • Uneven use and adoption of technology • Post-secondar y institutions that are not perceived to be aligned with meeting the region’s needs • Fewer people with university education and more without a high school diploma • Low attraction and retention of immigrants (5.9%) compared to Ontario (13.6%) • Skills gaps: Misalignment of talent needed and talent available. Within the region, there are unique approaches to driving innovation including public-private par tnerships. For example the Eastern Ontario Regional Network which has helped strengthen the technology infrastructure and create new models. Rethinking the approach to innovation should leverage oppor tunities to: • Promote innovation in existing for profit, nonprofit and government organizations • Pilot innovation in smaller communities and then scale • Leverage entrepreneurial culture and SMEs including farming • Focus on expanding markets • Exploit “RurBan” residents who move back and for th • Focus on key sectors and SMEs across sectors • Exploit technology to conquer the distance/density challenges and share resources

Page 28 of 192

Recommendations A number of recommendations have been provided within this explorator y study and repor t. These recommendations will inform an innovation strategy not only for the Eastern Ontario region, but for Canada as a whole. 1

Leverage technology infrastructure and create a coordinating mechanism or team to leverage network effects. The whole must be more than the sum of the par ts.

Share best practices and assets for the benefit of the entire region. Access to financing, mentoring and above all, build the profile of entrepreneurship. Focus on evidence-based approaches and improve tracking and evaluation. Learn from successes and from failures. Encourage, reward and celebrate entrepreneurs.

Look beyond incubating ICT star tups. Strengthen oppor tunities for sectors such as food processing and green technologies. Consider sectoral approaches and expanding access to specialized ser vices such as shared maker spaces, manufacturing and processing.

Drive ICT-enabled innovation across sectors. Encourage existing organizations – businesses, nonprofits and government agencies – to leverage technology and other innovative processes.

Develop a strategy to leverage postsecondar y assets to advance the region. Eastern Ontario has strong postsecondar y institutions but there seems to be untapped potential. Harness the power of postsecondar y institutions to drive innovation and provide the talent needed.

Succession planning and investment in family-based businesses is ver y impor tant in a community where there are strong and stable businesses without obvious heirs. Attracting immigrant entrepreneurs to the region to take over existing businesses could complement effor ts in generating new star tups.

Align strategies to develop and retain talent and leverage diversity. There is little doubt that the talent strategy and innovation strategy need to be aligned to attract—and more impor tantly—retain highly skilled workers in the region.

Lobby for “made in Canada” innovation strategy beyond the Toronto-Waterloo corridor. Current discussions of innovation tend to focus on ICT star tups without looking at the adoption of technology. They also tend to have a strong urban bias in spite of the strong evidence that smaller communities make impor tant contributions. Work together to access resources and political will and ensure that all levels of government and related agencies suppor t inclusive innovation.

Page 29 of 192

Develop stronger regional brand identity and work together to promote access to larger markets – GTA, upstate NY, International. This is one of the largest challenges to coordinated activity – “Eastern Ontario” too often is thought of as a space between rather than a distinct region. Building a shared narrative and telling the stor y is critically impor tant to building a coordinated strategy.

Improve information and resources sharing through coordinated access (eg. Innovation Por tal). There are many ser vices, programs and sources of funding available, as well as suppor t for research and development but navigating the range of programs and ser vices is a challenge. Leverage technology to suppor t information exchange and coordination can compensate for the lack of density in the region.

Conclusions The Eastern Ontario region possesses a handful of critical assets that can drive innovation within the region. Existing challenges could be addressed by rethinking an approach that leverages these assets and contributes to a more robust innovation strategy. Our explorator y study provides 10 recommendations for enhancing innovation within the region. Concepts from this study can also be applied more broadly to Canada as a whole. In terms of processes to move some of these ideas forward, developing a commitment that links strategy to action is critical. “Strategic Doing” is emerging as a strategy protocol for designing and guiding strategy in open, loosely connected networks. By linking talent, innovation networks, and human capital with a compelling narrative, the region can ensure that the strategy is more than words on paper and is strongly linked to action. Finally, there is little doubt that the models being developed in the region have application across the countr y, so telling the stor y will benefit not only Eastern Ontario but Canada’s innovation ecosystem. Creating scale through network effects is not just an issue in regions like Eastern Ontario, but it is also impor tant to a large countr y like Canada, characterized by distance and diversity.

Page 30 of 192

BACKGROUND

The Purpose of the Study The Eastern Ontario Wardens’ Caucus (EOWC) and their par tners, Ontario East Economic Development Commission (OEEDC), Eastern Ontario Regional Network (EORN) and Eastern Ontario Mayors Committee (EOMC), have pulled together the communities in the region to develop an evidence-based economic strategy in order to move the region forward. Eastern Ontario’s Economic Development Strategy (June 2014), identified three strategic priorities: Workforce Development and Deployment; Technology Integration and Innovation and; Integrated and Intelligent Transpor tation Systems. One of the recommendations for the Technology Integration and Innovation strategy is:

“

Map and profile Eastern Ontario’s Innovation Ecosystem to better understand the breadth of innovation ser vices (local, provincial and federal), collaborative supports and local assets that can contribute to establishing a competitive advantage for the attraction of businesses and investors, contribute to the retention and expansion of existing businesses and assist with stimulating business start-ups. Include network of innovation sites, incubators, research partnering between universities and businesses, investment capital networks, and relevant workforce development programs (p.29).

”

Our study responds specifically to this recommendation. Drawing on well established models of regional development and innovation, we collected information on activities and assets in the region to map the innovation ecosystem in order to inform the implementation of the economic development strategy for the region. Our preliminar y analysis showed that there are significant differences between the factors at play in Ottawa compared to the rest of the region. For the purposes of this study, Ottawa and the National Capital Region were excluded in order to more clearly understand the dynamics of innovation in smaller communities.

Page 31 of 192

Research Questions 1

What are the elements of an innovation ecosystem?

How can we assess and map innovation ecosystems?

What is the current economic profile of the region and what is the state of established businesses and total entrepreneurial activity (TEA) across stages?

What are the economic trends?

How do we assess the framework conditions in the region (infrastructure, financing etc.)?

Who are the key stakeholders in eastern Ontario in the innovation ecosystem?

Is the whole more than the sum of the par ts – i.e. are the assets coordinated and leveraged across the region?

What are the key linkages to other regional, national and international ecosystems?

From the perspective of potential entrepreneurs, star tups and established businesses what are the drivers and impediments to growth?

10 How well is technology deployed by businesses in the region to achieve organizational objectives?

Methods The study is based on an extensive review of documents, analysis of data and inter views with key stakeholders in order to better understand the components of the ecosystem and to assess current programs and needs. The study was conducted over the period of November 2015- April 2016. It included: •

Analysis of available Statistics Canada data, as well as economic development data from local entities to assess current levels and trends with respect to business activity (new and established businesses), jobs, talent updating and other sources

•

Development of an inventor y of key players and intermediaries in the ecosystem: investors, large employers, incubators, business ser vice providers and government agencies (at all levels)

•

Assessment of the innovation models and methods such as The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and enabling conditions, e.g., policies, infrastructure, capital, talent

•

Sampling of GEM entrepreneurial readiness (attitudes)

•

Consultations with key stakeholders to understand components in the system and their assessment of current programs and needs

•

Use and expansion of Magnet’s data analytics capacity on employment supply and demand.

Page 32 of 192

INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

Innovation drives economic development and growth, as well as producing social value. Most of the available innovation measures are based on linear models of inputs and outputs. But increasingly, it is recognized that innovation systems are complex and non-linear. Innovation is now understood as a multidirectional, multifaceted process involving multiple actors and includes not only the development of new components and products but new ser vices, technical standards, business models and processes. Moreover, it is increasingly recognized that innovation in the public and non-profit sector is foundational and fundamental, par ticularly in countries with heavy investments in infrastructure and public ser vices such as education and healthcare. While innovation has been typically focused on high growth sectors such as Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) or

Page 33 of 192

Biotech, there is evidence that driving innovation in traditional sectors is just as impor tant, including manufacturing, agriculture, ser vices, transpor tation and infrastructure. ICT and green technologies are still significant as industr y sectors, however, because of their capacity to transform other industries and to improve efficiency and productivity. It is also impor tant to understand the different trajectories innovation takes in different sectors, as well as the requirements and conditions for success. For example, it is possible to develop and take to market a new app that is wildly successful with minimal investments while commercializing biotech advances typically takes decades and many millions of dollars. Any innovation strategy or attempt to measure impacts must take into account these differences.

Although the innovation process is varied and non-linear by is its nature, there are some connecting elements. The innovation ecosystem in a par ticular region is a complex interplay of stakeholders, processes, and organizations in an enabling context. While models of innovation ecosystems var y in par t depending on context, the key elements generally include: • Post Secondary Institutions which are a source of intellectual proper ty and talent for public and private sector organizations • Startups which are created sometimes as a result of the commercialization of technologies developed in post-secondar y institutions • Established businesses which may adopt innovations and provide funding, investments or initial orders to star tup firms • Financial institutions and investors, who provide funding for star tups and existing businesses • The talent pool perhaps the most critical ingredient, may come from post-secondar y institutions, from existing companies, or new residents • Intermediaries which provide suppor t that can include incubators, accelerators, business advising ser vices etc. and may be tied to universities, public sector, private sector or a combination of both • Government agencies which develop policies that may enable or constrain innovation, provide significant suppor t to the innovation ecosystem and are also themselves targets for innovation • “Culture,” which is broad and amorphous, refers to the beliefs and values in a society related to entrepreneurship and innovation and is also thought to be a critical issue. A simplified diagram of an innovation ecosystem is below. Figure 1: Innovation ecosystems

One view of a university’s innovation ecosystem

Source: Morrison and Wunderlich (2016)

The European Union (EU) is at the forefront of developing innovation measures to allow cross countr y comparisons and has long used the Summar y Innovation Index to assess enabling conditions, firm activities and outputs. More recently, however, the limitations of this approach have been flagged and work continues to develop more sophisticated approaches that include impor tant dimensions like public ser vice innovation, a measure used for example, in Australia. 8

Page 34 of 192

Figure 2: Diagram of EU Innovation Measures

Source: European Union, 2012

Using this model to compare innovation in the 28 EU member states as well as non-member European countries and other nations, Switzerland was ranked as the world’s leader in innovation, followed by the United States, Japan, and South Korea. The United States and Japan are especially strong in business and public-private cooperation. Canada outperforms the EU across four indicators, most impor tantly in ter tiar y education and public-private co-publications. However, Canada lags in patent applications, medium and high-tech product expor ts, knowledge-intensive ser vice expor ts, and license and patent revenues from abroad (European Union, 2012). The EU model focuses primarily on technology-driven innovation and puts significant emphasis on linkages, internationally and domestically, among SMEs, and between SMEs and Universities, while other models focus on other indicators. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), one necessar y role of increased innovation is to compensate for the effects of public spending cuts (OECD, 2012). Yet, despite world-class academic research in macroeconomics and structural policy settings, Canada has not seen this research pay off in terms of business innovation and productivity growth (OECD, 2012). The OECD has identified a number of reasons for Canada’s poor performance in these areas. Canada’s “disadvantages” include uneven (though relatively low) capital taxation, limited capital markets for funding innovation, insufficiently strong competitive pressures in cer tain sectors, and weak ”connective tissues” that link research to commercialization.

Page 35 of 192

Also, with relatively abundant labour and low relative labour costs, at least until recently, Canadian firms have been under less pressure to innovate than firms in other countries (OECD, 2012, p. 29). Agrawal (2008) attributes Canada’s innovation deficit “chiefly to a weak commercialization culture at universities, along with an overly bureaucratic mindset among technology transfer offices (TTOs) when it comes to deal making” (as cited in OECD, 2012, p. 79). There has never been a more pressing need for Canada to develop a strong culture of innovation. According to the OECD (2012), while government suppor t for business innovation in Canada is one of the highest among OECD countries, this money is made available primarily through R&D tax credits as opposed to the direct funding of business innovation through, which is identified as a weakness in Canadian policy. A comparison of the measures used to evaluate TTOs in the literature are listed below in Table 1 using the EU framework in an effor t to distinguish enablers, activities and outcomes.

One of the most interesting studies in recent years provided by the OECD looks at innovation inputs and outputs. The analysis of Canada’s overall innovation ecosystem suggests that in terms of investments or inputs, we are ranked highly – 10th in the world – but our output performance is much below that, suggesting that there are oppor tunities to improve the efficiency and performance of our innovation ecosystems through evidence-based strategies. It follows that even in regions where the level of inputs may be lower, there remain oppor tunities to improve performance by being more strategic, better coordinated, more efficient, more nimble or more creative in the use of those resources.

SOURCES TABLE 1: Measures of Innovation - International Comparisons Measures

Sources

ENABLERS Human Resources Graduate Students or percentage of population with tertiary education

EU 2012; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Youth in population

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Youth in Education academic achievement

EU 2012; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Skills and training in the workforce

Tang et al., 2008

Proportion of university students enrolled in science, math and engineering

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Gender

Minniti, 2005; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Education or knowledge of English

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; OECD, 2010

Research Systems International co-publications

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Citations

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

International Students

EU 2012

Page 36 of 192

Measures

Sources

ENABLERS ICT penetration and quality of infrastructure

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Creation and nurturing of startups

Hall, Jaffe, & Tratjenberg, 2005; Rossi, 2006; Bottazzi, Da Rin, & Hellman 2008; Kaplan, Sensoy, & ,Strömberg, 2009

Inﬂuence of innovation networks and clusters or sectoral factors or industry

Niosi & Bas, 2001; Arechavala-Vargas, Díaz-Pérez & Holbrook, 2009

FIRM ACTIVITIES Finance and Support R&D or ICT expenditures

EU EU 2012,; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; Canada 2011

Innovation expenditures (rather than on R&D expenditure)

OECD, 2010

Gross domestic expenditure on R&D (GERD) as a percentage share of GDP

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Higher education performance of R&D, as a share of GDP

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Venture Capital

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Business expenditure on R&D (BERD) intensity by country

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Public funding for long-term research

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Firm Investments Investments in R&D and ICT

EU, 2012, Minniti, 2005; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; OECD, 2010

Non R&D Investments

EU 2012

Linkages and Entrepreneurship Inﬂuence of culture and regulations on innovation

Minitti 2005

SMEs innovating in-house

EU 2012

Innovative SMEs collaborating with others

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Industry relations, inﬂuence of innovation networks and clusters or sectoral factors or industry

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; Saetre, 2006; EU 2012; Levi & Autio, 2008; Beroggi, Levy & Cardinet, 2006Niosi & Bas, 2001; Arechavala-Vargas, Díaz-Pérez, & Holbrook, 2009

Intellectual Assets

Creation and nurturing of startups

Hall, Jaffe, & Tratjenberg, 2005; Rossi, 2006; Bottazzi, Da Rin, & Hellman 2008; Kaplan, Sensoy, & Strömberg, 2009

Gross domestic expenditure on R&D (GERD) as a share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Government of Canada, 2011

PCT Patent applications in societal challenges, share of all business ﬁnanced R&D performed by higher education sector

EU 2012; Government of Canada, 2011

Community trademarks, number of trademark applications

EU 2012; Government of Canada, 2011

Community designs, number of licenses from universities to businesses

EU 2012; Government of Canada, 2011

Page 37 of 192

Measures

Sources

FIRM ACTIVITIES Number of ﬁrms collaborating in innovative activities with public or private partners, government, and higher education institutions by size

Government of Canada, 2011

Increased number of prototypes

Jenkins et al., 2011

Increased number of publications

Niosi & Bas, 2001; Arechavala-Vargas, Díaz-Pérez, & Holbrook, 2009; Jenkins et al., 2011

OUTPUTS Inﬂuence of innovation networks and clusters on sectoral factors or industry SMEs with product or process innovations

EU 2012

SMEs with marketing or organizations innovations

EU 2012

High growth innovative ﬁrms

EU 2012

Specialization in a particular scientiﬁc discipline

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Relative impact and the level of international cooperation

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Creation and nurturing of startups / Spin-off revenues

Hall, Jaffe, & Tratjenberg, 2005; Rossi, 2006; Bottazzi, Da Rin, & Hellman 2008; Kaplan, Sensoy, & Strömberg, 2009Jenkins et al., 2011

Government and its agencies

Saetre, 2006; Levi & Autio, 2008

Industry relations

Saetre, 2006; European Union, 2012; Levi & Autio, 2008; Beroggi, Levy & Cardinet, 2006

Economic Effects Employment in knowledge intensive activities

EU 2012

Medium and high tech product exports

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Knowledge intensive services exports

EU 2012; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; , Collier, 2008

Patents and trademarks granted

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; OECD, 2010

Sales of new to market and new to ﬁrm innovations

EU 2012

New to market product innovators with and without R&D as a percentage of innovators

OECD, 2010

License and patent revenues from abroad

EU 2012

Increased number of prototypes

Jenkins et al., 2011

Increased number of publications

Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; Jenkins et al., 2011

Spin-off revenues

Jenkins et al., 2011

Page 38 of 192

Measures

Sources

OTHER Policies Tax policies or incentives

Minniti 2005;, Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010; Canada 2011

Inﬂuence of culture and regulations on innovation Research Systems

Minniti 2005, Levi & Autio, 2008; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Governments’ ﬁnancial programs or initiatives

Minniti, 2005; Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Countries’ political regimes

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Legal basis for securing property and contract rights

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Strength of investor protection

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Structure and level of sophistication of ﬁnancial sector

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Trade regime

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Proportion of women representation in decision making bodies, e.g., parliament

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

Public procurement policies and systems

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011; Science, Technology and Innovation Council, 2010

Government immigration policies

Lopez-Claros & Mata, 2011

In recent years, considerable criticisms have been made, par ticularly at Canadian post-secondar y institutions, about the innovation gap and the failure for large investments in research and development to translate into commercialization. Par t of this reflects the reward systems in universities: If publications and Tri-Council grants are the measures of success for tenure, then there is little incentive to focus on impact of work outside the University. This has been the subject of much debate concerning the extent to which universities in par ticular should be seen as drivers of economic and social development and the value of basic versus applied research. The impediments to effective commercialization and industrial par tnerships have been well documented and range from the current reward systems to training and culture.

Page 39 of 192

Intellectual Proper ty (e.g., publications, patents, etc.) may not measure innovation capacity if the linkages between the university and businesses are weak. Fur thermore, in order to understand entrepreneurship and the innovation across multiple countries, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) collects data in more than 30 countries on entrepreneurial intent and performance innovation focuses on the entrepreneurs themselves and the conditions suppor ting entrepreneurship. Using exper t inter views, GEM assesses “framework” conditions such as the availability of finance, government policies and programs, education, R&D transfer, commercial and physical infrastructure, and cultural and social norms. These themes are consistent with what is in the OECD model described above although the focus is more on the entrepreneur than on the context of policies and enabling factors. See figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Global Entrepreneurship: Monitor (GEM) Model

Source: GEM Consor tium (2013)

Page 40 of 192

Innovation In Smaller Communities According to the OECD, a new approach is needed in order to think about innovation and modernization of the rural economy. Instead of focusing on the deficits in small and rural communities, there is a renewed interest in an asset-based approach which focuses on what the region has available. In addition to focusing on sectors that can boost local economic development–renewable energy, tourism, forestr y, local foods, as well as ser vices such as health care and home care–there is also an oppor tunity to facilitate greater collaboration across firms and use new non-traditional forms of ser vice deliver y. Place-based approaches are par ticularly impor tant as the key drivers of growth are likely to be more specific to the region. The potential of strategies based on investment in and promotion of the natural, cultural and recreational amenities to drive growth in rural areas and small communities requires a complex approach that includes an analysis of infrastructure, private sector development and environmental policies. Focusing on increasing productivity in rural areas can help improve workforce skills, strengthen capital investment in firms and foster entrepreneurship. Strategies focused on identifying and mobilizing local assets rather than relying on external subsidies and other suppor t can help improve performance.

Page 41 of 192

Many of the characteristics of small and rural communities present disadvantages in the context of traditional approaches to measuring innovation. Long distances and low population density, for example, tend to make it more difficult to co-locate activities that would be mutually beneficial. At the same time, technology can be used to mitigate these factors. Uniform economy-wide policies tend to be designed to suppor t urban areas and fail to take into account the needs of smaller communities. An understanding of how to stimulate and recognize innovation in rural areas and small communities is critical to promoting innovation outcomes and growth. This understanding allows communities to turn knowledge into useful products and ser vices. It is also fundamental for building prosperity today and in the future. For example, when the firms in a regions innovate, low value-added commodities, such as soybeans, can become higher value-added products like crayons and candles. Indeed, having the ability to create new ideas, products and ser vices– and on a continuous basis—is critical to economic development at the local, regional and federal levels.

Traditionally, the rural economy tends to be dependent on low-end ser vices and manufacturing, with lower levels of education, weaker skills and an aging workforce, lower levels of innovation and formal R&D, lower productivity and limited entrepreneurial activities, lagging in internet access and SMEs with limited growth oppor tunities. However, there are still ways to leverage the assets, for example, by shifting focus from the number of jobs to the quality of jobs, by maximizing local markets to promote collaboration and clusters, by identifying regions with a strong entrepreneurial culture and replicating it, by investing in new ways to attract and develop staff, by leveraging public sector procurement to drive local development and innovation, by strengthening linkages to national and international markets and by

promoting mobility as with “rurban” (rural-urban) entrepreneurs who spend time between city and countr y. Recognizing and understanding the different types of innovation in rural areas is critical to facilitating these developments. Wal-Mar t, Bombardier, Ikea and Lego are all large companies that originated in small communities. One argument for star ting businesses outside of city centres is that smaller communities provide a “safe” space in which to refine products and business models. While craft and small-scale enterprises present one model of success, accessing larger national and international markets is key to scaling and growth.

Innovation Ecosystem Elements and Mapping The innovation ecosystem map allows different stakeholders to explore innovation in the region providing a framework for collecting and sharing information and also for setting goals and developing strategies to move forward that align with the region’s aspirations and capacity.

Post Secondary Institutions and Research Facilities For a relatively small population, Eastern Ontario is well ser ved by first class post-secondar y institutions. Excluding Ottawa, which is home to the trifecta of Carleton University, University of Ottawa and Algonquin College and also Pickering, which is home to University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Eastern Ontario houses two universities – Trent and Queen’s – as well as Loyalist College in Belleville and Sir Sanford Fleming in Peterborough. Given the population, this is a high level of post-secondar y capacity. Added to this is the fact that Queen’s is ranked as one of the top research-intensive universities in the countr y with extremely strong science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) faculties. 16

Page 42 of 192

The university punches above its weight in terms of research intensity, having its sponsored-research income growing to nearly $190 million in the 2013 fiscal year, up from $168 million in the previous year (RE$EARCH Infosource, 2014). Queen’s ranks sixth in the countr y in terms of research intensity, which measures research income per full time faculty member. The university is home to many prominent researchers and scientists including a recent Nobel Prize winner. Many prominent, successful entrepreneurs are alumni of Queen’s, including Elon Musk and “Desh” Deshpande. While Trent University is smaller and less research intensive, it boasts unique exper tise in many areas relevant to the eastern Ontario ecosystem, including strong programs in environmental sciences, material sciences and social innovation. Trent recently ranked first among primarily undergraduate universities for “publication intensity” and placed second for “publication impact” and “number of publications” in its categor y. Loyalist College in Belleville has a strong histor y of providing career-relevant education for the high tech industr y and is well known for its programs in the skilled trades, as well as business and entrepreneurship education. In terms of objective assessments of capacity of post-secondar y institutions Eastern Ontario is well ser ved. More information is needed to empirically evaluate some of the measures of impact on innovation considered impor tant.

Page 43 of 192

Respondents from this study were mixed in their assessments of the extent to which post-secondar y assets are leveraged in the region. While Queen’s is actively par ticipating in a series of new initiatives aimed at accelerating innovation (discussed below under intermediaries) respondents indicated that there was room for improvement in strengthening connections between the university, local businesses and community organizations. Few respondents indicated that the post-secondar y institutions were sources of research or information which helped promote their businesses and few knew where to star t to look for suppor t from the Queen’s, Trent or Loyalist. Sir Sanford Fleming received kudos for internships and placements in local businesses. Some business people described successful collaborations with the post-secondar y institutions while others expressed frustration with their interactions with academics whom they indicated appeared “more interested in publishing papers than in solving business problems.” In general, it would seem that the region has incredible assets in its post-secondar y institutions but the connections between those institutions and businesses are uneven. Apar t from the Universities, the nuclear industr y has its own research ecosystem in the region –for example, GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Rolls Royce (ODIM Numet Limited) located in Peterborough; Sandvik Materials Technology Canada and Nu-Tech Precision Metals Inc. located in Arnprior ; Bubble Technology Industries, located in Chalk River and Cameco Corporation Conversion Facility and Fuel Manufacturing, located in Por t Hope.

Table 2 below shows some of the measures identified within existing literature to assess the impact of research. Measures of Impact

Sources

General The monetary yield or commercial success of research relative to money invested in the research / returns on public investment.

Toole, 2012

University-Industry Engagement The effect of consulting, research, and educational activities on the share of sales attributable to new or improved products

Arvanitis et al., 2008

The effect of technology proximity on the probability of university-industry technology transfer activities. The propensity and intensity (diversiﬁcation) of transfer activities with universities.

Woerter, 2011

Survey of the sources of knowledge used by ﬁrms (frequency of university research as a source of industry ideas).

Cohen et al., 2002

Access to upstream modes of knowledge, provided by universities and research centres to ﬁrms.

Feller et al., 2002

Exclusive license agreements secured for transferred technologies.

Van der Berghe & Guild, 2008

Perception of the strategic value of transferred technologies.

Van der Berghe & Guild, 2008

Spinoffs and Behaviours of Academics Capacity of academics to recognize entrepreneurial opportunities – determined by individual traits, past experiences, and tenure status.

Clarysse et al., 2011

University resources and capabilities compared to the rate of spin-off formation.

O’Shea et al., 2005

Contributions to GDP from spinoffs compared to government investment in research.

Vincett, 2010

Characteristics of technology transfer ofﬁces compared to the rate of spinoff formation.

Algieri et al., 2011

Characteristics of the regional economy compared to the rate of spinoff formation.

Algieri et al., 2011

Performance of spinoffs compared to other startups.

Salvador, 2011

The disclosure of inventions by academics.

Owen-Smith & Powell, 2001; Siegel et al., 2003; Hulsbeck et al., 2011

The effects of patenting on publications and knowledge transfer.

Crespi et al., 2011

The locality of collaboration.

Hussler & Rondé, 2007

Page 44 of 192

Measures of Impact

Sources

Technology Transfer Ofﬁces Patent applications, licenses, royalties, and sponsored research.

Thursby et al., 2001

Effectiveness of TTOs as determined by Faculty reward systems, stafﬁng policies, and cultural differences between universities and ﬁrms.

Siegel et al., 2003

Effectiveness of TTOs as determined by the degree of centralization, incentive structures, and decision monitoring processes.

Debackere & Veugelers, 2005

Performance of TTOs as measured by invention disclosures, total university research income, number of staff, the level of intellectual property expenditures, and the size and R&D intensity of the regional economy.

Chapple et al., 2005

Number of licenses and licensing income.

Kim, 2011

Effectiveness of TTOs as determined by conﬂict of interest policies, royalty sharing, and spinoff leave time.

Caldera & Debande, 2010

Research Consortia Level of potential R&D spillovers within the consortium.

Branstetter & Sakakibara, 2002

The degree of product competition among consortium members.

Branstetter & Sakakibara, 2002

Business Support Programs Revenue growth, equity ﬁnancing, and patent applications as affected by publicly funded advisory services.

Cumming & Fischer, 2012

Science Parks and Incubators Elasticity of ﬁrm revenues to investments in R&D. Efﬁciency of R&D investments compared to off park ﬁrms.

Yang et al., 2009

Job growth, revenue growth, patents, proﬁts, frequency of new products and services being introduced to the market.

Lindelof & Lofsten, 2002; 2004

Venture patent citations to university research, venture success/failure.

Rothaermel & Thursby, 2005

Managerial and market differentiation and star power characteristics; strategic management, monitoring, and assistance comprehensiveness/quality; learning by incubates; and resource utilization.

Hackett & Dilts, 2008

R&D Tax Credits Innovation output measured in terms of the number of new products, the proportion of sales from the new products, and whether the new products are new to the world or just Canada.

Page 45 of 192

Czarnitzki et al., 2011

Measures of Impact

Sources

Country Level Studies Changes in national industrial development and global competitiveness as a result of investments.

Choi et al., 2009

Impact of national culture, economic openness, and patent protection frameworks on levels of investment.

Versakelis, 2001

Economic Impact Quantitative and non-quantitative data on the regional and national economic impacts of funding.

Roessner et al., 2010

Spillovers University knowledge spillover measured by distance from ﬁrms; impact on growth rate of ﬁrms.

Audrestech & Lehmann, 2004

Extent of technology and knowledge transfer in relation to the distance from the source of knowledge (the research institute).

Coccia, 2008

Relationship between technology sourcing and the impact of international stock on national ﬁrms / international spillover.

Grifﬁth et al., 2006

Impact of domestic and foreign R&D spillovers on productivity: elasticity of output in relation to inputs.

Hignon, 2007

Innovation performance in terms of in-house R&D expenditure, bought-in R&D, and intracompany knowledge transfer.

Frenz & Ietto-Gillies, 2009

Social Embeddedness Likelihood that the ﬁrm will cooperate with a public research organization.

Busom & Fernandez-Ribas, 2008

Length of ﬁrm-institute relationship; use of “high information gap” services.

Izushi, 2003

Firm-level learning, knowledge-spillovers within “communities of practice”, and community identiﬁcation.

Autio et al., 2008

Dialogues bridging research and practice, facilitating learning in relationships between researchers and ﬁrm representatives.

Roelofsen et al., 2011

Effect of relationship factors like trust, geographic proximity, communication effectiveness, intellectual property policies, patents, and licenses on technology transfer.

Santoro & Gopalakrishnan, 2001

Effect of qualiﬁcation of staff, managerial attitude, and length of relationship on technology transfer.

Barge-Gil & Modrego, 2011

Population Ecology Effect of industry competition on the efﬁciency of the university technology commercialization industry.

Cardozo, et al., 2011

Collaboration Scale of internal and external networking activity.

Soetanto & Jack, 2011a

Technological capabilities and labour productivity of ﬁrms.

Barajas et al., 2011

Likelihood of ﬁrms to collaborate.

Eom & Lee, 2010

Impact of patent awards on the timing of cooperation and licensing agreements between ﬁrms and entrepreneurs.

Gans et al., 2008

Page 46 of 192

Talent Pool The talent pool for innovation can consist of highly skilled or lower skilled individuals, migrants (from other communities or internationally) and covers a broad range of sectors and disciplines. While many innovations are driven by technological breakthroughs (and so science and technology disciplines do play an impor tant role), other businesses in the area are grown from ideals about innovative products or ser vices. Regardless of the technological intensity, however, respondents talked about the need to attract and retain young, highly trained individuals, although the definitions of skills required varied considerably. There were concerns expressed by some that the post-secondar y institutions were not aligned with local talent needs and/or that they were not educating people who stayed in the region. Significant differences across the region were also noted with Kingston, for example, having high demand for public sector professionals and management staff while other communities had shor tages of tradespeople or ser vice workers. Respondents were not uniform in their perception of the role of immigration in driving economic development, but they did agree on the issues around the aging population.

Page 47 of 192

Intermediaries: Incubators and Accelerators

The Eastern Ontario Region has eight incubators which are designed to help launch star tups and grow small to medium enterprises (SMEs). Each of these incubators are home to five to more than twenty companies, and each has a different area of focus and scale (See Appendix). The region is also home to a number of structured acceleration programs, as well as less formal business mentoring and coaching systems. There are many ways to assess the effectiveness of incubators and accelerators depending on their core objectives. Indicators may include performance outcomes (such as program sustainability and growth, tenant sur vival and growth, contributions to the university mission, and community impacts), management policies (par ticularly the effective use of resources, e.g., governance, finance and capitalization, operational policies, target markets), and value added from ser vices (with a focus on the perceived value, e.g., space, business assistance, human resources, consulting). Table 3 provides a list of some of the indicators that have been used. A recent repor t by the Provincial Auditor General (2015), coupled with new programs such as the Campus-Led Accelerator initiative and Canadian Accelerator and Incubator Program, are forcing the question of outcome measurement and impact. In the case of Eastern Ontario, many of the initiatives are too new to assess but some of the indicators may be instructive in formulating questions about their role and impact. There is limited analysis of the incubators in the region but one message that emerged in the discussion is the oppor tunity to do a better job of sharing information about assets and resources available on the one hand and companies being incubated on the other. Additionally, oppor tunities to access coaching and mentoring from some of the larger incubators and to form B2B collaborations were identified as desirable. 22

Page 48 of 192

Table 3: Assessments of Incubators Measures of Success/ Performance Indicators

Sources

Deﬁnition and scope of industry

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006

Governance structure or sponsors

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Fan et al., 2004; Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997

Services provided, e.g., space, training, faculty consultants, etc.

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Fan et al., 2004; Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997; Lendner, Dowling, 200; Allen & McCluskey, 1990; Chirgui, 2012; UKBI, 2009; CSES, 2002

Incubation period

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Matt & Tang, 2010; CSES 2002

Graduation criteria

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006

Objectives and goals

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Fan et al., 2004; Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997

Industry sector

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006

Incubator’s image

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006

Laboratories and equipment

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Fan et al., 2004

Technology transfer programs

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Philbin 2008; Fan et al., 2004; Lendner, Dowling, 2007; Tamasy, 2007

Finance and capitalization; sources of funding

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Fan et al., 2004; Espina, 2008; Lendner, Dowling, 2007; Mian, 1997; Chirgui, 2012

SMEs with product or process innovations

European Union, 2012

SMEs with marketing or organizational innovations

European Union, 2012

High-growth innovative ﬁrms

European Union, 2012

Job creation or employment in knowledge-intensive activities

European Union, 2012; Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Lendner, & Dowling, 2007; Tamasy, 2007; Westhead & Storey, 1994; Allen & McCluskey, 1990; M’Chirgui, 2012; Akcomak & Taymaz, 2004

Community-related impacts or regional economic development

Fan et al., 2004; Smilor, 1987; Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997; Lendner, & Dowling, 2007; Akcomak & Taymaz, 2004

Medium and high-tech product exports

European Union, 2012; Basile, 2011

Knowledge-intensive services exports

European Union, 2012

Sales of new to market and new to ﬁrm innovations

European Union, 2012; Akcomak & Taymaz, 2004

Incubator revenues

Siegel, Veugelers & Wright, 2007; Fan et al., 2004

Incubatees revenues

Allen & McCluskey, 1990

Incubatees contributions to the sponsoring university in equity return

Fan et al., 2004; Mian, 1997

Incubator occupancy rate

Allen & McCluskey 1990; UKBI, 2009, Smilor, 1987

Target market

Fan et al., 2004; Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997

Entry/exit policies

Mian, 1997; Lendner, Dowling, 2007; Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Chirgui, 2012; Viera Borges, 2007

Incubatee performance review policy

Mian, 1997

Page 49 of 192

Measures of Success/ Performance Indicators

Sources

Equity/ royalty policy

Mian, 1997;Viera Borges, 2007

Intellectual property safeguard policy

Mian, 1997

Incubatees’ survival and growth

Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Espina, 2008; Bergek & Norman, 2008; Fan et al., 2004; Lendner, & Dowling, 2007; Matt & Tang, 2010; Mian, 1997; Westhead & Storey, 1994; Allen & McCluskey, 1990; Hacket and Dilts 2004; UKBI, 2009; Amezcua, 2010; Chen, 2009; Schmitt and Bayad, 2003

Program sustainability and growth

Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997

Attainment of mission of university

Espina, 2008; Mian, 1997

Operational policies

Espina, 2008

Input and output

Colombo, Delmastro, 2002; Hamdani & Statistics Canada, 2006; Thursby, 2002

Patent applications per ﬁrm

Philips, 2002

Patents, licenses and copyrights granted

Colombo, Delmastro, 2002; Lendner, & Dowling, 2007; Thursby, 2002; Lofsten, Lindelof, 2002

Skill level of the workforce

Colombo, & Delmastro, 2002; M’Chirgui, 2012

A dimension of innovative activity

Colombo, & Delmastro, 2002

Research commercialization

Lendner, & Dowling, 2007

Number of ﬁrm per incubators

Matt & Tang, 2010; CSES, 2002

Number of employees per incubated ﬁrms

Matt & Tang, 2010

Number of discontinued businesses

Philips, 2002

Start-up creation, coaching and support

Lendner, & Dowling, 2007; Tamasy, 2007; Chirgui, 2012; Schmitt and Bayad, 2003

Improvement of university image

Lendner, & Dowling, 2007

Technological sophistication

Westhead & Storey, 1994

Type and quality of connections to universities

Westhead & Storey, 1994

Cost per job (gross)

CSES, 2002

Page 50 of 192

Intermediaries: Business Services In the Eastern Ontario Region, there are many agencies providing business ser vices and advice ranging from municipal small business centres to local Chambers of Commerce. The feedback on the value of these ser vices was uneven – some felt they were ver y helpful, others felt that there were significant gaps in the suppor t required. Some of this was dependent on location and on requirements. What was consistent, however, was the need for a single point of access to information and resources available from a user perspective. In addition, many respondents saw oppor tunities to better coordinate and share information across the region. While travel distances are an impediment, more extensive use of electronic means – shared websites and webinars, for example – was suggested. Additionally, ensuring that information is shared about specialized resources, events and assets was par ticularly impor tant.

Startups Eastern Ontario, exclusive of Ottawa, has a higher rate of self-employment than the provincial average. According to 2011 census data, more than 11% of Eastern Ontario respondents repor ted self-employment compared to 10.3% for the rest of the province. However, most of the SMEs in the region are relatively small with 90% having fewer than five employees. In addition, most of the companies have been in existence for more than six years, meaning the propor tion of star tups among all SMEs in the region is relatively low.

Page 51 of 192

Established Businesses and Organizations The structure of the economy in Eastern Ontario (excluding Ottawa) has a lower percentage of companies in the ICT sector than the provincial average or in innovation-intensive regions like Kitchener-Waterloo. A detailed analysis of the data from the consultation under taken to suppor t Eastern Ontario’s Economic Development Strategy identifies some impor tant features of the innovation ecosystem in the region. Some established businesses in the region repor ted understanding the impor tance of innovation to their business. Most of them focused on market-driven innovation (new products and ser vices) rather than technology-driven innovation. High-end value-added farming, green tech, as well as niche consumer products and ser vices bring high-value jobs. Building resources and capacity to drive innovation in existing industries and government agencies is critically impor tant to promote the economic revitalization of the region.

Investors Lack of financing is a common complaint of new and established businesses across Canada, and the issue emerges in Eastern Ontario as well. There is little doubt that established financiers have biases towards cer tain sectors and that a dispropor tionate amount of venture capital is invested in companies located in large urban of high-tech focused centres. At the same time, there is evidence that Eastern Ontario has developed innovative approaches to providing financing for star tups, as well as established businesses, that appear to hold promise. For example, an evaluation of the return on investment generated from Community Fund Development Corporations in Southern Ontario indicated that ever y dollar loaned produced $15.64 in revenues and $3.70 in wages in the fifth year “ (Ference-Weicker & Company, 2014). A number of angel investor networks exist with some focusing only on companies located in specific communities and others investing in both eastern Ontario and beyond. Some respondents felt that there were many local investors who would contribute $20-25K but that these investments would tend to follow well-established big name investors. Larger investors in the region have made multimillion dollar investments. Some deals have a mixed group of local and other investors. A recurring theme was that there are many programs suppor ting star t-up funds –although these were repor ted to be difficult to navigate –but that there is limited access to “patient capital” in the 200 – 500K range. As well, some felt that many local companies with potential for growth simply were not positioned to consider or find appropriate investors and that intermediaries play a critical role.

Page 52 of 192

Government Policies and Programs Many respondents identified a wide range of government programs that they had accessed or helped companies access but noted that there were issues related to fragmentation, overlap and access to information. Many also noted that navigating forms and applications was time consuming and difficult and that consequently many businesses did not take advantage of the resources available to them. There was also a strong feeling that while there were programs from both the Federal and Provincial government to suppor t economic development in smaller towns and rural regions, they were mostly ignored in discussions of innovation and that government innovation policy and discussion was ver y urban and high-tech focused. In the words of one respondent, “Ontario and Canada’s innovation policies need to extend beyond the Toronto-Waterloo corridor.” Respondents also discussed government programs like Fed Dev, which leverages private sector investments in economic development and innovation as being useful for ensuring that local businesses had “skin in the game” and also that the programs had real benefits. Some individuals commented on issues around “red tape” and bureaucracy. Others noted the need for “one-stop shopping.” There was no awareness of any level of government using procurement to provide oppor tunities for businesses in eastern Ontario although many thought this could be a good idea. Few people discussed taxes which had a local focus, although it did come up in discussions with larger organizations or those who saw themselves as competing with American companies. Some felt that business-suppor t ser vices provided by governments were strong and others were not convinced that people working in local business-suppor t ser vices had the exper tise needed.

Page 53 of 192

It was suggested that an increase in networking oppor tunities might help local businesses access specialized ser vices and suppor ts that are not economical to provide in small communities (for example R&D and SRED suppor t). It is clear that there are many ser vices and programs aimed at suppor ting small businesses, entrepreneurs and innovation, but there are concerns regarding lack of coordination in programs and ser vices, ease of access, as well as their impact (See Appendix for a list).

Infrastructure The impor tance of physical and vir tual infrastructure is critical in geographically dispersed communities. Strong technological infrastructure can compensate for lack of population density and while there is no replacement for face to face interactions, high-speed networks can provide ways to better share information and exper tise, as well as access talent, financing, ser vices and markets.

Eastern Ontario’s strategic attention to broadband infrastructure provides the capability to take advantage of many of the region’s assets and to offset some of the deficits. However, more needs to be done to develop applications, promote technology -based innovation and encourage the use of the technological infrastructure to strengthen connections among geographically dispersed elements in the ecosystem and build critical mass through network effects.

Culture of Innovation Culture is comprised of values and attitudes which both shape and reflect behaviour. In discussions of national innovation strategies, we see reference to the need to build a “culture of innovation” typically characterized by values of creativity, individualism, and risk tolerance. The International Association of Science Parks (IASP) (2002) sees building a “culture of innovation” along with “promoting the competitiveness of its associated businesses and knowledge-based institutions” as the principal role of a science parks. The OECD has also highlighted the impor tance of expanding entrepreneurial training to build entrepreneurial culture, encouraging “independence, competition, excellence, entrepreneurial spirit, and flexibility” (OECD Innovation Strategy, 2010: p. 10). The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (Minitti, 2005) has compiled a series of surrogate measures to compare national indices of entrepreneurship, and other organizations (notably the OECD, 2010) have compiled related but distinct indices of innovation. Singapore, for example, is one of the few countries that has formally defined a strategy to build entrepreneurial mindsets as par t of its national innovation strategy (Fetters et al., 2010). One of the stronger predictors of entrepreneurship is that a parent was an entrepreneur or self-employed.

Farming communities, in some respects, provide the most competitive and Darwinian experiences of entrepreneurship which, if tapped into, can drive strong cultures of entrepreneurship. This may have changed somewhat in recent years, owing to concer ted effor ts by government and foundations. Examples were cited of interesting and innovative programs aimed at promoting entrepreneurial intent even in public schools but in general there was a feeling that there was a lack of attention to entrepreneurial education and to celebrating eastern Ontario’s entrepreneurial success stories.

Page 54 of 192

Table 4: Measuring the impact of entrepreneurship education programs Measures of Impact

Sources

Number of spin-offs founded by students during and after the program.

Mwasalwiba, 2010

Economic development of spin-offs/startups (i.e., longevity, size, sales volume, investment volume, turnover, number of employees, etc.).

Nandram & Samson, 2004; Charney & Libecap, 2000; Henry et al., 2003; Kailer, 2010

Total tax revenue of a program’s graduates compared to the cost of the program (cost-beneﬁt analysis).

Mitterauer, 2003; Kailer, 2010

Graduate employment level.

Queenton et al., 2012; Kailer, 2010; Allan et al., 2009

Development of personal income of graduates from programs.

Charney & Libecap, 2000; Mitterauer, 2003; CRS, 2003; Holzer & Adametz, 2003; Kailer, 2010

Student performance in business plan competitions.

Queenton et al., 2012; Kailer, 2010; Allan et al., 2009

Scientiﬁc productivity.

Dzisah et al., 2012;Van Looy et al., 2011

State investment in the program.

Dzisah et al., 2012;Youtie and Shapira, 2008

Industry investment in the program. Applications to the program / international applications to the program.

Queenton et al., 2012; Friedman, 2008; Kailer, 2010; Allan et al., 2009

Contribution to the community (i.e. technology transfer, new jobs created, or assistance to local entrepreneurs

Mwasalwiba, 2010; Henry, 2004;Vesper and Gartner, 1997

Effects of startups on the regional economy (incorporating “regionality” into the assessment of impact).

Dzisah et al., 2012; Kim, Kim, & Yang, 2012; Lawton-Smith & Bagchi-Senb, 2012; Etzkowitz, 2008; Kailer, 2010; CRS, 2003

Knowledge transfer, academic standards, changes in attitudes and inclinations toward entrepreneurship, future student/graduate plans, and entrepreneurial potential. (Data collected through student and alumni surveys, as well as pre-/post-tests and psychological testing.)

BMBF, 2002; Fueglistaller et al., 2004; Fayolle, 2004; Boissin, 2003; Klapper, 2004; Carayannis et al., 2003; Pihkala & Miettinen, 2002; Holzer & Adametz, 2003; Bauer & Kailer, 2003; Nandram & Samson, 2004; Nakkula, 2004; Lucas & Cooper, 2004; Westhead et al., 2001; Kailer, 2010; Charney and Libecap, 2000;Vesper and Gartner, 1997; Hynes, 1996; Souitaris et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2006; Fayolle et al., 2006;Veciana et al., 2005; Peterman and Kennedy, 2003

Competence/performance of graduates after employment.

Schamp & Deschoolmeester, 2002; Kailer, 2010

Comparison with students who did not graduate from entrepreneurship education programs and comparison between programs (in terms of the above metrics).

Westhead et al., 2001; Fueglistaller et al., 2004; Schamp & Deschoolmeester, 2002; Sternberg & Mueller, 2004; Tohmo & Kaipainen, 2000; Kailer, 2010

International comparison between students from Entrepreneurial Education (EE) programs and non-EE educated students, as well as between EE programs.

Carayannis et al., 2003; Franke & Luethje, 2004; Kailer, 2010;Veciana, 2005

Kennedy, 2003

Page 55 of 192

Innovation Index 1 While there are a range of approaches to assessing innovation, recent work has focused on providing frameworks for assessing innovation at the regional level. Working with leading researchers in the US (US, 2010), the U.S. Economic Development Administration has provided a framework to assist regions in assessing their innovation capacity based on evidence. The Innovation Index aligns with other models of innovation and focuses on four groups of indices: Human Capital, Economic Dynamics, Productivity and Employment and Economic Wellbeing. Each of these elements has been given a weight and specific metrics (see Figure 4 below). The data helps to focus discussions among regional stakeholders. Each of these elements is impor tant for understanding and assessing the capacity and potential of the innovation ecosystem in Eastern Ontario. Human Capital examines characteristics of the regional population and labour. Factors such as high educational attainment, ability to attract and retain youth measured through growth in young adults and of the propor tion of innovation-related occupations and jobs relative to the overall labour force are the key measures. Productivity and Employment assesses economic growth, regional attractiveness and direct measures of innovative activity. Economic Dynamics addresses local business conditions and resources available to entrepreneurs and businesses. Resources such as research and development funds for example are seen as fueling high growth innovation. Economic Well-Being examines employment and personal income as impor tant indicators. The University of Indiana based researchers concluded that measures that have the greatest statistically significant relationship to innovation are: • Change in high-tech employment share • Average small establishments per 10,000 workers • Percent of population, ages 25-64, with post-secondar y credentials • Population growth rate for ages 25-44.

1 The Innovation Index is available at www.statsamerica.org/innovation. For more background on the topic, see the article “Measuring Regional Capacity for Innovation” in the Januar y-Februar y issue of InContext. The Innovation Index was developed as part of a recent study conducted for the U.S. Economic Development Administration and done in collaboration with Purdue Center for Regional Development, Strategic Development Group, Inc., the Rural Policy Research Institute, and Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc.

Page 56 of 192

An impor tant dimension of Eastern Ontario is that it has a higher percentage of workers employed in SMEs than the provincial average. When Ottawa and the Capital Region is excluded from the statistics we see that in Eastern Ontario more than 11% of workers are in SMEs compared to 10.3% across the province. On the other measures Eastern Ontario does not fare par ticularly well. Its share or growth in the high tech employment sector is below average. As well, its population is aging. The average age in the region is higher than the provincial average and the level of education is lower in terms of University graduation but higher in terms of college graduation.

Figure 4: Innovation index measures

Human Capital (30%)

Productivity and Employment (30%)

Economic Dynamics (30%)

Economic Well Being (10%)

Page 57 of 192

Regional Data And Analysis As detailed in Appendix 3, the data necessar y to measure and evaluate the innovation ecosystem of eastern Ontario is extensive and not currently available. To be able to look at Eastern Ontario and exclude Ottawa from the analysis, a limited amount of data can be used. First is the Statistics Canada Household Sur vey. This was completed in 2011 and repor ts summar y information for various geographic levels. Second is more recent labour market data collected from various web sources and processed. This data from Magnet/Vicinity Jobs provides information about both the supply and demand in the local labour markets. Data from both of these sources have been used and combined and compared to develop an economic model of Eastern Ontario. The focus is on Eastern Ontario not including Ottawa, but data for Eastern Ontario including Ottawa and the Province of Ontario are also included. Specific information and obser vations are included in Appendix 2 along with greater detail for the various communities across the region. Summarized information and general trends are presented later in this section. First, a synopsis that encapsulates all of the various regional economic data and findings is presented. The only available measure of entrepreneurial activity is the extent of self-employment. Eastern Ontario has a higher share of its workforce that is self-employed (11.3%) compared to the province (10.3%) or Canada (10.7%).

It also has a higher share of self-employed individuals that are women (37.3%) than the province (35.7%) or Canada (36.0%). A por tion of this self-employment share is from agriculture, as both independent farmers and any unpaid family members who also work the farm would be counted as self-employed. This does indicate a slightly higher degree of entrepreneurship across the region, whether by choice or necessity. This could provide useful leverage around which a culture of entrepreneurial innovation could flourish. Eastern Ontario’s overall economy and economic future is dominated by high growth but low value employment. Retail and Healthcare account for 50% of all newly posted jobs in the region and are 25% of existing jobs.

Page 58 of 192

While some Healthcare jobs are higher paying, many are not. Given the lower average wages seen across the region, it is reasonable to suspect that most existing and new Healthcare jobs are not par ticularly high-paying. The much higher share of new jobs being in these two industr y sectors is not encouraging: There is growth, but it is not in desirable places. One somewhat bright spot for the region can be seen in Manufacturing. While not a sector that is showing much growth and a sector that has decreased over time in the region, across Eastern Ontario, Manufacturing is about 10% of existing employment and is also about 10% of all new job postings. The region is holding its own while the rest of Ontario has a higher share of existing employment in Manufacturing than the share of newly posted jobs in Manufacturing. The provincial difference isn’t large but is consistent with a declining industr y while eastern Ontario could even be showing slight growth from new job postings.

Page 59 of 192

The region has several sectors where higher growth is projected at the national level and this can be seen in the job posting and labour market data in other places, but Eastern Ontario is not showing much growth potential. Fur ther, the region already has a lower share of existing employment in these sectors which combined with lower growth will result in the region falling even fur ther behind in these sectors. The impact on the region is exacerbated through these sectors, which in addition to having a high growth rate, are also higher paying. Specifically, this can be seen in Professional, Scientific and Technical Ser vices; Information and Culture; Ar ts, Enter tainment and Recreation. Weakness in these high growth, high wage, high potential sectors—especially ones typically associated with innovation—poses a significant challenge for the region. One option to overcome this would be to focus innovative activity and attention in the less “traditional” sectors where the region has a larger existing presence and/or growth and/or growth potential such as Education or Agriculture or, possibly, Manufacturing.

The Education sector may provide an interesting oppor tunity for the region. It is wor th noting that with Ottawa excluded, the region is strong. With Ottawa included, however, the results are even stronger. The region currently has a higher share of its existing employment in the Education sector (8.2%) compared to the province (7.5%). And, the region’s share of new jobs in Education (5.3%) is higher than the provincial average (3.8%). The Education sector is a strength for the region, and the indicators suggest that it is and will continue to grow faster than across the province. However, it also may be slowing down. The share of the existing Education workforce is higher than the share of new jobs in Education. So, the creation of new jobs is not keeping pace with current employment. It is possible that this is the result of having lower turnover in Education jobs – a strong possibility. But, this result is also indicative of slower growth or even a decline in the sector. Any emphasis on Education should be pursued with care, and additional information from other primar y sources (i.e., educational institutions) should be considered. Looking beyond specific sectors, the economic models show three other areas of concern for Eastern Ontario: educational attainment and job skill requirements, full-time employment, and incomes. Despite the region’s strength in Educational employment, average educational attainment levels are lower across the region than across Ontario and Canada. The region has a high share of its population without a high school diploma and a higher share with only a high school diploma and lower shares with university undergraduate or graduate degrees.

The educational requirements for newly posted jobs in the region also reflect these lower levels. Compared to the province, the region has a greater share of new jobs that require either no education or lower levels of education and a smaller share of new jobs that require a university education. In other words, not only are existing levels of education lower than the province, but the new jobs being created also require a lower level of education. In effect, the region is in an educational attainment deficit that is just getting deeper. A similar situation exists around full-time employment. The region has a lower share (78%) of existing jobs that are full-time than the province (86%). This is also true of newly posted jobs where the region’s share that is full-time (63%) is also lower than the provincial share (75%). In both cases, the share of new jobs that is not full-time is lower than the share of existing jobs that are not full-time. While some of this is the result of more jobs shifting away from stability and permanence, including full-time status, much of this is likely the result of par t-time jobs needing to be filled much more often, creating a greater share of posted jobs that are par t-time. Never theless, the lower shares in both existing and new jobs for the region show that the region already has fewer full-time jobs than the province and the trend is for that to continue and possibly get worse.

Page 60 of 192

The final area of concern seen in the economic analysis is the current and potential result of all the other factors. At all levels (individual, family, household), average incomes across the region are lower than the province. Only Prescott, Ontario and Frontenac, Ontario have any average income above the provincial average—and even then, just barely. Factors such as the preponderance of jobs in lower paying sectors, fewer existing or new jobs in higher growth/higher value sectors, lower educational attainment levels, and fewer full-time jobs all combine to create a situation where wages are lower. Creating an innovation ecosystem across the region would help to stimulate growth and quality of jobs and would help to raise incomes and increase prosperity across Eastern Ontario. The Education sector may provide an interesting oppor tunity for the region. It is wor th noting that with Ottawa excluded, the region is strong. With Ottawa included, however, the results are even stronger. The region currently has a higher share of its existing employment in the Education sector (8.2%) compared to the province (7.5%). And, the region’s share of new jobs in Education (5.3%) is higher than the provincial average (3.8%). The Education sector is a strength for the region, and the indicators suggest that it is and will continue to grow faster than across the province. However, it also may be slowing down. The share of the existing Education workforce is higher than the share of new jobs in Education. So, the creation of new jobs is not keeping pace with current employment. It is possible that this is the result of having lower turnover in Education jobs – a strong possibility. But, this result is also indicative of slower growth or even a decline in the sector. Any emphasis on Education should be pursued with care, and additional information from other primar y sources (i.e., educational institutions) should be considered.

Page 61 of 192

Looking beyond specific sectors, the economic models show three other areas of concern for Eastern Ontario: educational attainment and job skill requirements, full-time employment, and incomes. Despite the region’s strength in Educational employment, average educational attainment levels are lower across the region than across Ontario and Canada. The region has a high share of its population without a high school diploma and a higher share with only a high school diploma and lower shares with university undergraduate or graduate degrees A similar situation exists around full-time The educational requirements for newly posted jobs in the region also reflect these lower levels. Compared to the province, the region has a greater share of new jobs that require either no education or lower levels of education and a smaller share of new jobs that require a university education. In other words, not only are existing levels of education lower than the province, but the new jobs being created also require a lower level of education. In effect, the region is in an educational attainment deficit that is just getting deeper. The region has a lower share (78%) of existing jobs that are full-time than the province (86%). This is also true of newly posted jobs where the region’s share that is full-time (63%) is also lower than the provincial share (75%). In both cases, the share of new jobs that is not full-time is lower than the share of existing jobs that are not full-time. While some of this is the result of more jobs shifting away from stability and permanence, including full-time status, much of this is likely the result of par t-time jobs needing to be filled much more often, creating a greater share of posted jobs that are par t-time. Never theless, the lower shares in both existing and new jobs for the region show that the region already has fewer full-time jobs than the province and the trend is for that to continue and possibly get worse.

Page 62 of 192

• The Eastern Ontario region (excluding Ottawa) has significant assets spread across the whole of the region. The entire region has a greater presence and diversity (of many kinds) when considered in its entirety.

A fur ther summar y of some of the detailed information presented in Appendix 2 is presented next. This information has been incorporated into the analysis above, though this section provides greater detail. Looking across the various items, patterns and trends emerge:

• The large decline in the manufacturing base over the 2001-2011 period is seen in many ways, including looking at industr y and occupational information. The share of employment in manufacturing for the region is now lower than the province’s share.

• Although the focus of this repor t is on Eastern Ontario exclusive of Ottawa, Ottawa has an impor tant influence on the region. Ottawa is an employment location for residents of the surrounding communities. It also has Information industr y, educational and other resources that could be assets for the remainder of the region. The remainder of the discussion focuses on the region with Ottawa excluded.

Page 63 of 192

• Self-employment is higher in the region than the province or countr y, and a higher share of those who are self-employed are women. • The region has a much higher percentage of its workforce in par t-time jobs compared with the province or national averages, but roughly the same number of people with full-year (versus par t-year) employment and the same average number of weeks worked (45).

• The strength and impor tance of agriculture to the region is apparent through a variety of the measures presented. While agriculture has declined as a share of total employment, it has still gained concentration in the region relative to the rest of Canada. • The Information industr y, on the other hand, has increased, but not as quickly as the rest of the countr y. The concentration of employment in Information remains below the national average with nearly 35% fewer people employed in that industr y than across Canada.

While attracting immigrants remains a challenge for the region, people are moving into and across the region. This mobility suggests strategies may be successfully developed that can focus on attraction and retention, but they will need to be targeted and focused on the region’s assets. Recent (2001-2011) immigrants entering the region is even lower : • Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa – 1.1% • Ontario – 8.1% • Canada – 6.6% The Education sector has been growing and has seen its employment concentration increase relative to the national average, but education levels, especially for university and graduate education, remain well below provincial and national averages. However, the average for other post-secondar y education (college, cer tificates, trades, apprenticeships, etc.) is higher than provincial and national averages, which suggests a different kind of workforce is available across the region than in many other places. Public Administration is still pretty impor tant in the region with Ottawa excluded –it comprises mostly of people working in/around Ottawa. While the region needs to understand itself without being overshadowed by Ottawa, it still needs to think about Ottawa in context. Agriculture is more impor tant in the region than across the province and has grown in impor tance relative to the rest of the countr y. This is not true, however, in terms of employment share. The region has seen a slightly higher population of people who identify as Aboriginal. Hastings and Renfrew has higher concentrations, but many places across the region are higher than the average in other regions in Ontario.

Detailed information is presented in Appendix 2 which includes information for Eastern Ontario’s individual cities and counties (Statistics Canada’s Census Divisions) and shows summar y information with Ottawa included and excluded. This includes tables, graphs, and char ts on: • Self-Employment • Economic Diversification • Industrial Specialization • Employment by Industr y • Employment by Occupation • Immigrant Status and Period of Immigration • Immigrant Source Regions • Immigrant Generational Status • Aboriginal Identity • Mobility • Education Levels • Industr y Mix • Occupational Mix • Full-Time / Par t-Time Employment • Full-Year / Par t-Year Employment • Average Income Data was extracted from Magnet/Vicinity Jobs (www.magnet.today), which have been pulled from various web sources and extensively processed to eliminate duplicates, and categorized based on labour supply (people looking for jobs) and labour demand (job openings). This information is from the first quar ter of 2016 (Januar y – March) and represents an up-to-date snapshot of the labour market across the region. This includes tables, graphs, and char ts on: • Labour Supply (resumes posted) by • Month and Location • Labour Demand (new jobs posted) by • Month and Location • Labour Demand by Industr y • Labour Demand by Occupation • Labour Demand by Education/Skill Required • Labour Demand by Full-Time Status

Page 64 of 192

RECOMMENDATIONS AND FURTHER WORK

The dilemma that ever y regional leadership team must resolve is how to direct limited resources that produce the desired outcomes for the region in the long-term. This is no small feat, since the leadership team must weigh the likely returns with associated risks (as well as questions of returns for whom). Mapping the ecosystem can help assess a region’s capabilities and help regional leaders focus the strategic dialogue on the issues that matter. Eastern Ontario has a well–developed economic development strategy which outlines a series of goals. This analysis will add to that. While conventional approaches to innovation focus on technology-driven approaches and, in par ticular, the ICT sector, an emerging body of research suggests that other approaches are needed to understand the often overlooked potential of regions characterized by small and rural communities. 39

Page 65 of 192

The consultation reinforced the impor tance of defining the principal pillars of the region’s economic development strategy and, in par ticular, the impor tance of attracting and retaining talent and exploiting technology. Our analysis has produced ten recommendations for fur ther development. In addition to a wide range of conventional sources of financing for star tups and businesses, Eastern Ontario also has access to government programs including the Community Futures Program, as well as specialized funds such as First Stone Venture Par tners. While access to financing is always an issue, easy-to-navigate information about the sources and use of funds and more suppor t for accessing them was a pressing concern for some respondents.

RECOMMENDATIONS Based on this explorator y study, there are a number of areas we have identified that should, in our view, inform an innovation strategy for the region (and indeed the countr y). Creating scale through network effects is not just an issue in regions like Eastern Ontario but it is also impor tant to a large countr y like Canada, characterized by distance and diversity. 1

Leverage technology infrastructure and create a coordinating mechanism or team to leverage network effects. The whole must be more than the sum of the par ts.

Look beyond incubating ICT startups. Strengthen oppor tunities for sectors such as food processing and green technologies. Consider sectoral approaches and expanding access to specialized ser vices such as shared maker spaces, manufacturing and processing.

Drive ICT-enabled innovation across sectors. Encourage existing organizations – businesses, nonprofits and government agencies – to leverage technology and other innovative processes.

Develop a strategy to leverage postsecondary assets to advance the region. Eastern Ontario has strong postsecondar y institutions, but there seems to be untapped potential. Harness the power of postsecondar y institutions to drive innovation and provide the talent needed.

Page 66 of 192

Improve information and resources sharing through coordinated access (e.g., Innovation Portal). There are many ser vices, programs and sources of funding available, as well as suppor t for research and development but navigating the range of programs and ser vices is a challenge. Leveraging technology to suppor t information exchange and coordination can compensate for the lack of density in the region.

In terms of processes to move forward some of these ideas forward, developing a commitment that links strategy to action is critical. “Strategic Doing” is emerging as a strategy protocol for designing and guiding strategy in open, loosely connected networks. By linking talent, innovation networks, and human capital with a compelling narrative, the region can ensure that the strategy is more than words on paper and is strongly linked to action. Ed Morrison, regional economic development advisor at the Purdue Center for Regional Development, has championed the notion of “strategic doing” as an approach to driving transformative change in regional planning: “we need to move our mindsets from developing “plans” to developing flexible and lean “planning platforms.” Think of them as a new form of “civic infrastructure.” Finally, there is little doubt that the models being developed in the region have application across the countr y, so telling the stor y will benefit not only eastern Ontario but Canada’s innovation ecosystem. Figure 5: Strategic Doing Protocol

Source: Morrison (2014)

Page 67 of 192

APPENDICES Innovation Ecosystem Scorecard

Appendix 1.1: Innovation Ecosystem Scorecard (Innovation in American Regions) Weight

Score

Assessment Notes

Human Capital

30%

M/L

Ages 25-64 with a college diploma

20%

Includes other post-secondary

Ages 25-64 with a bachelor’s degree

20%

Includes graduate degrees

Young Adult Population Growth Rate

20%

Based on overall mobility & other patterns

Technology based occupations

20%

M/L

Sciences and Natural Resources (includes Agriculture) Occupations

Average High Tech Employment share

20%

Information (L); Professional, Technical and Scientiﬁc Services (L); Healthcare (M) Industry Sectors

Economic Dynamics

30%

M/L

52.5

Average Small Establishments

12.5%

Only reported at provincial level. Special order from Statistics Canada to get more geographically detailed information.

Average Venture Capital Investment per 10,000 GDP

25%

Anecdotal and from interviews.

Average Establishment Churn

25%

Only reported at provincial level. Special order from Statistics Canada to get more geographically detailed information.

Broadband Connections per 1000 households

12.5%

Given national efforts

Change in Broadband density

12.5%

Given national efforts

Average large Establishments

12.5%

Only reported at provincial level. Special order from Statistics Canada to get more geographically detailed information.

Productivity and Employment

30%

Job growth to population growth ratio

25%

(2001-2011; job growth/population growth) Eastern Ontario: 7.8% / 6.2% Ontario: 11.5% / 19.5%

Change in High Tech Employment Share

25%

Information (L); Professional, Technical and Scientiﬁc Services (M); Healthcare (M)

Average Patents per 1000 workers

25%

Patents (from OECD 2013) per 100,000 Eastern Ontario: 4.97 Ontario: 11.21

Gross Domestic Product per worker

12.5%

Wages (2011) Eastern Ontario: $25,268 Ontario: $31,618

Average Annual Rate of Change in GDP per Worker

12.5%

Change in Wages (2001-2011) Eastern Ontario: 23.0% Ontario: 14.2%

Appendices

Page 68 of 192

Appendix 1.1: Innovation Ecosystem Scorecard (Innovation in American Regions) Weight

Score

Economic Well Being

10%

Average Poverty rate

20%

Household Income Levels

Average Unemployment rate

20%

Eastern Ontario (2011): 7.0% Ontario (2011): 8.3% Economic Regions (April 2016) Ottawa: 7.3% Kingston-Pembroke: 7.7% Muskoka-Kawarthas: 5.7% Ontario: 7.0%

Average Net Internal Migration Rate

20%

Mobility

Change in per Capital Personal Income 20%

Change in Average Income (2001-2011) Eastern Ontario: 35.4% Ontario: 23.7%

Change in Wage and Salary Compensation per Worker

10%

Change in Wages (2001-2011) Eastern Ontario: 23.0% Ontario: 14.2%

Change in Proprietor’s Income per Proprietor

10%

Not available at regional level

M/L

52.9

Overall Score

Assessment Notes

Appendices

Page 69 of 192

Appendix 1.2: Definitions of the Variables Used in the Computation of the Component Indexes of the Innovation Index (Indiana Business Research Center, 2009) A. Human Capital Classiﬁcation

Education attainment

Population growth

Occupation mix

High-tech Employment

Variable

Deﬁnition

“Percent of Population Ages 2564 with Some College or an Associate’s Degree, 2000” “Percent of Population Ages 2564 with a Bachelor’s Degree, 2000”

These variables measure the extent to which the skills and knowledge, that could contribute to a population’s capacity to innovate, are acquired through the education attainment of (i) some college or an associate’ degree and (ii) a bachelor’s degree or higher.

“Mid-Aged Population Growth Rate, 1997 to 2006”

“Technology-Based Knowledge Occupations Share, 2007”

“Average High-Tech Employment Share, 1997 to 2006”

This variable measures the increase in the number of residents ages 25 to 44. These people are most likely to engage in innovative activities. They are also expected to be less risk averse and more entrepreneurial. These residents are likely to expand the innovative and entrepreneurial characteristics of the base community as well. This variable measures the extent to which the combination of local industries can possibly contribute to innovation. Innovation here is reﬂected by the existence of technologybased industries that are hypothesized to highly likely favor innovative behaviors, including but are not limited to the development of new and innovative ideas, products and processes that might lead to economic growth. This variable measures the extent to which a place’s occupational and industry mix can provide either (i) the existing capacity to generate innovative products and processes or (ii) the ability to enhance local innovative capacity by attracting new ﬁrms and new talents.

B. Economic Dynamics Classiﬁcation

Variable

Deﬁnition

R&D investment

“Average Private Research & Development per $1,000 Compensation, 1997-2006”

This variable measures the private R&D expenditure relative to the compensation to workers and proprietors.

Venture capital investment

“Average Venture Capital Investment per $10,000 GDP, 2000 to 2006”

This variable measures the availability and/or the easiness of access to venture capital funds for the launch of new ideas and the expansion of innovative ﬁrms.

Broadband density

Churn

Business size

“Broadband Density, 2007” “Change in Broadband Density, 2000 to 2007”

“Average Establishment Churn, 1999 to 2004”

“Average Small Establishments per $10,000 Workers, 1997 to 2006” “Average Large Establishments per 10,000 Workers, 1997 to 2006”

These variables measure the availability of the high-speed internet connections that can (i) help businesses and individuals collaborate and/or (ii) connect businesses and consumers, from anywhere. These two variables record the number of residential high-speed connectors per 1,000 households and the annual average change in the number of broadband holding companies. This variable measures the turnover rate of the local businesses, in terms of ﬁrm entry (growth) and exit (contraction) rates. These rates reﬂect the extent to which innovative and efﬁcient companies replace outdated ﬁrms that failed to modernize their techniques and processes.

These variables measure the existence of small ﬁrms that are thought to be highly adaptable and can easily change their processes to conduct innovative activities.

Appendices

Page 70 of 192

Appendix 2 Definitions of the Variables Used in the Computation of the Component Indexes of the Innovation Index (Indiana Business Research Center, 2009) continued C. Productivity and Employment Classiﬁcation

Variable

High-tech employment growth

“Change in High-Tech Employment Share, 1997 to 2006”

Job and population growth

“Job Growth to Population Growth Ratio, 1997 to 2006”

Patent

“Average Patents per 1,000 Workers, 1997 to 2006”

This variable measures the IBRC’s ﬁler-adjusted patent data as recorded by the U.S. Patent Ofﬁce. A single patent may be counted multiple times if it consists of ﬁler locations in different places.

“Average Annual Rate of Change in GDP ($Current) per worker, 1997 to 2006” “Gross Domestic Product ($Current) per Worker, 2006”

These variables measure a place’s level of current-dollar GDP per worker today (2006) and the growth in value over the past decade.

Gross domestic product

Deﬁnition This variable measures the extent to which the share of hightech employment, for skilled and specialized workforce critical to innovative activities, is increasing relative to the total employment. In turn, this measures also the degree to which home grown and high-tech ﬁrms have expanded their presence. This variable compares the employment growth with the population growth to reﬂect whether job creation of a place can keep up with the inﬂux of people to and/or the natural growth of people of the place. Strong employment growth is desirable for an innovative place.

D. Economic Well-Being Classiﬁcation

Variable

Deﬁnition

Poverty

“Average Poverty Rate, 2003 to 2005”

This variable measures the average of the three (2003-2005) years’ poverty rates of the place. Its inverse is used in the computation of the component index.

Unemployment

“Average Unemployment Rate, 2005 to 2007”

This variable measures the average of the three (2005-2007) years’ unemployment rates in the place. Again, its inverse is used in the computation of the component index.

Net migration

“Average Net Internal Migration Rate, 2000 to 2006”

This variable measures the net result of people moving in (out of) a place due to (because the lack of) some appealing factors such as employment opportunities and environment amenities.

“Change in Wage and Salary Compensation per Worker, 1997 to 2006” “Change in Proprietors Income per Proprietor, 1997 to 2006”

These variables measure the growth in how much workers and proprietors made as their income based on their places of work. The values of the variables reﬂect the relationship between the innovative activities and their rewards based on where these activities take place.

“Change in Per Capita Personal Income, 1997 to 2006”

This variable measures the growth in income by place of residence.

Compensation Growth

Personal Income Growth

Appendices

Page 71 of 192

Human Capital Variables included in the human capital component index suggest the extent to which a county’s population and labour force are able to engage in innovative activities. Counties with high levels of human capital are those with enhanced knowledge that can be measured by high educational attainment, growth in younger age brackets of the workforce (signifying attractiveness to younger generations of workers), and a sizeable number of innovation-related occupations and jobs relative to the overall labour force. Education: Educational attainment measures the skills and knowledge that contribute to a population’s capacity to innovate. The research team was par ticularly interested in individuals in the labor force with ter tiar y degrees. Thus, educational attainment was divided into two categories: • Some college or an associate’s degree • Bachelor’s degree or higher The distinction is made to capture the relative impor tance of a knowledge differential, together with regional distinctions in the types of degrees earned. In many states, educational funding mechanisms favour 4-year universities. Elsewhere state policy tends to favour 2-year community colleges and vocational schools. An impor tant educational differential is also present within states and counties where higher concentrations of bachelor’s degrees tend to surround metropolitan areas, whereas associate degree concentrations tend to be elevated in more rural counties where fewer residents have the resources or ability to travel to distant four-year institutions. Community colleges and vocational schools are more widely dispersed and proximate to rural residents. They also tend to provide education at a lower cost, with easier access, and tend to offer more flexible course schedules, such as evening or weekend courses. Community colleges are also more likely to cater to a region’s economic development needs than larger universities.

Appendices

Page 72 of 192

51 46

Population growth rate: A growing population is desirable. But growth in the number of newborns or retirees does little to suggest whether those persons most likely to engage in innovative activities are present. For this reason, population growth rates are confined in this study to ages 25 to 44. The lower bound ensures transient college students typically aged 18 to 21 become less of a factor in influencing the overall rate of growth, whereas the upper bound signifies a point at which a professional’s geographic location would likely remain more stable. The 25-to-44 age bracket is likely to be less risk averse and more entrepreneurial. Moreover, population growth in this age bracket suggests the possibility that new residents are likely to expand the innovative and entrepreneurial characteristics of the base community.

Occupational Mix: Cer tain occupational mixes favor innovative behaviors. The research team defined six technology-based knowledge occupation clusters that are hypothesized to have a higher probability of developing new and innovative ideas, products and processes that drive economic growth: • Information technology • Engineering • Health care and medical science practitioners and scientists • Mathematics, statistics, data and accounting • Natural sciences and environmental management • Postsecondar y education and knowledge creation

Appendices

Page 73 of 192

Appendices

Page 74 of 192

Productivity and Employment The productivity and employment component index describes economic growth, regional desirability, or direct outcomes of innovative activity. Variables in this index suggest the extent to which local and regional economies are moving up the value chain and attracting workers seeking par ticular jobs. High-Tech Employment Share Growth: Just as the share of high-tech employment in a countr y was an impor tant input, the extent to which that share is increasing relative to total employment is an impor tant performance measure. Firms requiring a highly skilled and specialized workforce are drawn to innovative areas. In a similar way, this measure also registers the degree to which home-grown, high-tech firms have expanded their presence. Growth in the share of high-tech employment suggests the increasing presence of innovative activity and signifies that high-tech firms are growing in the county or region both in relative as well as absolute terms. Job Growth-to-Population Growth Ratio: High employment growth relative to population growth suggests jobs are being created faster than people are moving to a region. Even though the ratio measures the change in level between jobs and population (and therefore, can’t be used to compare rates of growth), it can rank order counties or regions in terms of employment performance. A high ratio between these two variables indicates strong employment growth. A negative value signifies that population is growing while employment is declining or vice versa. In cases for which population is declining while employment is increasing, the absolute value of the ratio is used as that would be considered favourable employment performance.

Appendices

Page 75 of 192

Patent Activity: Newly patented technologies provide an indicator of individuals’ and firms’ abilities to develop new technologies and remain competitive. The number of patents produced is a commonly used output measure for innovative activities, but the data can mislead. Patent data are coded to distinguish between the residence of the filer and the recorded location of the employer (if the applicant is not a private inventor), but the recorded location of the employer may or may not correspond to the location of the work that produced the patent, especially if the employer is a large, diversified company with many locations. In addition, the available patent data cover only utility patents and not all patent types. Patent data are recoded from the raw data provided by the U.S. Patent Office and awards patents to any county from which one of the filers repor ted as their location. This means that for any single patent with more than one filer, a patent may be counted multiple times if filers are located in different counties. Patents can also be an inaccurate indicator of innovation outcomes, par ticularly in areas where a single firm overwhelms the total patent count, such as Eli Lilly in Indianapolis. Gross Domestic Product: The final component of the productivity and employment component index is the single most impor tant measure of productivity available—gross domestic product (GDP). The index incorporates both the level of a county’s current-dollar GDP per worker today, and also growth in the value over the past decade.

Economic Dynamics The economic dynamics component index measures local business conditions and resources available to entrepreneurs and businesses. Targeted resources such as venture capital funds are input flows that encourage innovation close to home, or that, if not present, can limit innovative activity. Venture Capital Investment: Venture capital (VC) funds are used to launch new ideas or expand innovative companies. In the United States, VC may be responsible for up to 14 percent of all innovative output activity. VC investment firms are highly selective with their investments to maximize the probability of high returns. The return on VC, and possibly the impor tance of VC, is diminished somewhat by the fact that the VC investments are typically management-intensive. Looking for VC funding may consume a considerable level of effor t by the seeking firm’s management, just as VC firms exer t considerable effor t seeking suitable projects to invest in.

Appendices

Page 76 of 192

Broad Density: Broadband provides high-speed Internet connections to businesses and consumers. Several state-level studies have attempted to capture the effect of adding broadband capacity to a region’s infrastructure. These studies suggest that broadband capacity has an overwhelmingly positive effect on economic performance. High-speed Internet access ensures that businesses and individuals can collaborate from vir tually any location. Code Connections per 1,000 Households 0 1 2 3 4 5

Zero Zero < x <= 200 200 < x <=400 400 < x <=600 600 < x <=800 800 < x

The Innovation Index uses 2 measures of broadband density. The first is the number of residential high-speed connections per 1,000 households. The FCC repor ts these data in ranges, not as a specific number of connections in a par ticular county (see below). The midpoint in the range is presented within the index output. For a custom region—an aggregation of two or more counties—the midpoint for the region is calculated as the weighted average of the midpoints of Churn: Competition is crucial to innovation. Market structures can influence the degree to which innovation is even possible. Specifically, markets with high rates of firm entr y have been linked to increased levels of innovation. Conversely, the rate at which businesses shut their doors or reduce their workforce indicates a decrease in economic deadwood. Together the growth and contractions along with bir ths and deaths produce the notion of economic churn, which ser ves as an indicator of the extent to which innovative and efficient companies replace outdated firms unable to modernize techniques and processes. Churn has been linked to positive employment growth and is not subject to agglomeration effects that often distinguish urban and rural economic structures. Business Sizes: Small firms, it is thought, are highly adaptable and can easily change their processes to incorporate new ideas. In recent years, high merger rates between small and large firms have coincided with increased technological influence of small firms. Some evidence, however, suggests these acquisitions may not be significant sources of innovation for large firms. Theoretically, a higher propor tion of large businesses would positively contribute to innovation through the increased availability of funds for research and development, as well as the resources to directly employ scientists rather than hire out research ser vices. Available data, however, do not identify whether, or the degree to which, an establishment is engaged in innovation activities. Moreover, using data on large establishments, defined as establishments with 500 or more employees, may be of limited utility for explaining innovative capacities in rural counties with small economies. Just the same, because the variable has some theoretical merit, the number of large establishments per 10,000 workers remains in the index.

Appendices

Page 77 of 192

Economic Well-Being Innovative economies improve economic well-being because residents earn more and have a higher standard of living. Decreasing pover ty rates, increasing employment, in-migration of new residents and improvements in personal income signal a more desirable location to live and point to an increase in economic well-being. Average Poverty Rate: Innovative economies have greater employment oppor tunities with higher compensation, thus lowering rates of pover ty. Reduced rates of pover ty will tend to lag growth in employment oppor tunities. As a result, the last three years of the most recent data are used. Since a high pover ty rate is a negative outcome, the index uses the inverse of the average pover ty rate. Average Unemployment Rate: Innovative economies have greater employment oppor tunities and lower unemployment rates. Since a high unemployment rate is a negative outcome, the index uses the inverse of average unemployment rate. Net Migration: Migration measures the extent to which a county or region is broadly appealing and excludes other elements of population dynamics such as fer tility rates. While people may migrate into a region for a host of reasons, from employment oppor tunities to environmental amenities, migration out of a region almost cer tainly signals declining economic conditions and the inability to keep the innovative talent that will spawn economic growth in the future.

Appendices

Page 78 of 192

Appendices

Page 79 of 192

Compensation: Compensation data convey how much workers make based on their place of work. Likewise, proprietors’ income is also based on place of work. Compensation and proprietor’s income, therefore, probably provide a strong relationship between the activities of innovation and the rewards of innovation based on the location of innovation. Growth in Per Capita Personal Income: As an alternative to measuring remuneration based on place of work, per capita personal income (PCPI) measure incomes by place of residence. Because PCPI includes other forms of income in addition to wages, salaries and fringe benefits, it is a more comprehensive measure of well-being. That said, the linkage between where innovation occurs (county of work) and the financial rewards of innovation (county of residence) is less direct.

$ Appendices

Page 80 of 192

Regional Data And Analysis Appendix 2.1: Regional Data and Analysis Self-Employment in Eastern Ontario (2011, Household Sur vey) Total Workers Name

Percent SelfEmployed

Share SelfEmployed who are

GNR*

Total

Male

Female

Self-Emp

Self-Emp Male

Self-Emp All Female

Men

Women Men

Women

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

55,470

28,810

26,665

6,140

3,855

2,290

11.10% 13.40% 8.60%

62.80% 37.30%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

47,930

24,930

23,005

5,270

3,470

1,800

11.00% 13.90% 7.80%

65.80% 34.20%

Ottawa

21.8

498,370

253,485

244,885

45,345

27,745

17,600

9.10% 10.90% 7.20%

61.20% 38.80%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

51,190

26,390

24,800

5,960

3,885

2,065

11.60% 14.70% 8.30%

65.20% 34.60%

Lanark

39.1

34,760

17,680

17,075

4,365

2,825

1,540

12.60% 16.00% 9.00%

64.70% 35.30%

Frontenac

29.2

78,855

39,280

39,575

7,060

4,165

2,890

9.00% 10.60% 7.30%

59.00% 40.90%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

20,815

10,845

9,975

2,155

1,340

820

10.40% 12.40% 8.20%

62.20% 38.10%

Hastings

32.4

66,330

34,240

32,090

6,350

3,980

2,375

9.60% 11.60% 7.40%

62.70% 37.40%

Prince Edward

37.3

11,890

6,130

5,755

1,860

1,185

675

15.60% 19.30% 11.70%

63.70% 36.30%

Northumberland

36.3

41,370

21,375

19,995

5,860

3,695

2,165

14.20% 17.30% 10.80%

63.10% 36.90%

Peterborough

38.1

67,445

34,305

33,145

7,785

4,750

3,035

11.50% 13.80% 9.20%

61.00% 39.00%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

36,130

19,020

17,115

5,025

3,395

1,630

13.90% 17.80% 9.50%

67.60% 32.40%

Haliburton

47.9

7,575

4,015

3,565

1,205

800

400

15.90% 19.90% 11.20%

66.40% 33.20%

Renfrew

33.8

51,785

27,480

24,300

5,480

3,105

2,375

10.60% 11.30% 9.80%

56.70% 43.30%

Eastern Ontario

1,069,915

547,985

521,945

109,860

68,195

41,660

10.30% 12.40% 8.00%

62.10% 37.90%

Eastern Ontario w/ Ottawa

571,545

294,500

277,060

64,515

40,450

24,060

11.3% 13.7% 8.7%

62.70% 37.29%

Ontario

6,864,985

3,542,030 3,322,960 706,425

454,005

252,415

10.30% 12.80% 7.60%

64.30% 35.70%

Canada

17,990,080 9,388,570 8,601,510 1,926,990 1,233,685 693,310

10.70% 13.10% 8.10%

64.00% 36.00%

*non-response rate for Household Sur vey The self-employed include persons with or without a business as well as unpaid family workers. Includes self-employed with an incorporated business and self-employed with an unincorporated business. Also included among the self-employed are unpaid family workers.

Appendices

Page 81 of 192

Appendix 2.2: Economic Diversification

OM1:1B=M8D=<-/7=.E8R:6-I8S$!##T !"!!

!"#!

!"$!

!"%!

!"&!

!"'!

!"(!

!")!

!"*!

!"+!

#"!!

,-.-/01/1234 5–67 89:68;/-:<=»59:9/? @97 .=:37 A.1/B1:.C8D2:69789:68;>-:39//E F1/.42B0-/>9:6 G9H9/.498 59?-7 5-::1I89:68J66=:3.1: K-:L/-H ,/-7M1..89:68K277-» N/1:.-:9M @9>=02/.1: ,/=:M-8O6H9/6 P..9H9

O97 .-/:8 P:.9/=18J<-/93O97 .-/:8 P:.9/=18Q=:27 8P..9H98J<-/93-

*non-response rate for Household Sur vey The economic diversity index is bounded between 0 and 1. A community that has the same industrial structure as the Canadian economy is given a value of 1 and is considered well diversified. A community that has a completely different industrial structure than the Canadian economy is given a value of 0 and is considered poorly diversified. Appendices

Page 82 of 192

Degree of Industrial Specialization and Change over Time The following four graphs show the degree of industrial specialization compared to the national average across the region (x-axis) and the change in that specialization between 2001 and 2011 (y-axis). A specialization index value of 1.0 means that the region has the same concentration of employment in that industr y as the national average. Greater than 1 indicates a higher concentration; less than 1 a lower concentration. The size of the bubble is the total employment in that industr y in the region in 2011. The two sets of graphs show Eastern Ontario with Ottawa (first two) and without Ottawa (next two). Within each set, the second graph is simply a “zoom in” on the por tion of the graph around (1.0, 0.0%) to provide clarity around all the overlapping bubbles. Appendix 2.3: Eastern Ontario degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time

Appendix 2.4: Eastern Ontario degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time (zoomed in)

Appendices

Page 83 of 192

Appendix 2.5: Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time

Appendix 2.6: Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa degree of industrial specialization and Change over Time (zoomed in)

Appendices

Page 84 of 192

Appendix 2.7: Share of Workforce by Industr y (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011)

!"!# $"!# %"!# &"!# ‘"!# (!"!# ($"!# (%"!# (&"!# (’"!# (()+,-./01/,23)45,261,73)4-68-9+):9;)8/91-9+ $()<-9-9+3)=/:,,7-9+3):9;)5-0):9;)+:6)2>1,:.1-59 $$)?1-0-1-26 $@)A5961,/.1-59 @(B@@)<:9/4:.1/,-9+ %()C85026:02)1,:;2 %%B%D)E21:-0)1,:;2 %‘B%F)G,:96H5,1:1-59):9;)I:,285/6-9+ D()J945,K:1-59):9;)./01/,:0)-9;/61,-26 D$)L-9:9.2):9;)-96/,:9.2 D@)E2:0)261:12) :9;),291:0) :9;)02:6-9+ D%)M,54266-59:03)6.-291-4-.):9;)12.89-.:0)62,N-.26 DD)<:9:+2K291) 54).5KH:9-26):9;)2912,H,-626 D&);K-9-61,:1-N2):9;)6/HH5,13)I:612)K:9:+2K291) :9;),2K2;-:1-59) 62,N-.26 &()O;/.:1-59:0)62,N-.26 &$)P2:018).:,2):9;)65.-:0):66-61:9.2 Q(),163)2912,1:-9K291) :9;),2.,2:1-59 Q$)..5KK5;:1-59):9;)455;)62,N-.26 ‘()R182,)62,N-.26)S2>.2H1)H/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59U F()M/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59

O:612,9) R91:,-5)$!!(

Appendices

Page 85 of 192

O:612,9) R91:,-5)$!((

R91:,-5)$!((

A:9:;:)$!((

Appendix 2.8: Share of Workforce by Industr y, Eastern Ontario Only (2001 & 2011)

O:612,9) R91:,-5)$!!(

O:612,9) R91:,-5)$!((

Appendices

Page 86 of 192

Appendix 2.9: Share of Workforce by Industr y, Eastern Ontario Only - Minus Ottawa (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011) !"!# $"!# %"!# &"!# ‘"!# (!"!# ($"!# (%"!# (&"!# (’"!# (()+,-./01/,23)45,261,73)4-68-9+):9;)8/91-9+ $()<-9-9+3)=/:,,7-9+3):9;)5-0):9;)+:6)2>1,:.1-59 $$)?1-0-1-26 $@)A5961,/.1-59 @(B@@)<:9/4:.1/,-9+ %()C85026:02)1,:;2 %%B%D)E21:-0)1,:;2 %‘B%F)G,:96H5,1:1-59):9;)I:,285/6-9+ D()J945,K:1-59):9;)./01/,:0)-9;/61,-26 D$)L-9:9.2):9;)-96/,:9.2 D@)E2:0)261:12) :9;),291:0) :9;)02:6-9+ D%)M,54266-59:03)6.-291-4-.):9;)12.89-.:0)62,N-.26 DD)<:9:+2K291) 54).5KH:9-26):9;)2912,H,-626 D&);K-9-61,:1-N2):9;)6/HH5,13)I:612)K:9:+2K291) :9;),2K2;-:1-59) 62,N-.26 &()O;/.:1-59:0)62,N-.26 &$)P2:018).:,2):9;)65.-:0):66-61:9.2 Q(),163)2912,1:-9K291) :9;),2.,2:1-59 Q$)..5KK5;:1-59):9;)455;)62,N-.26 ‘()R182,)62,N-.26)S2>.2H1)H/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59U F()M/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59

O:612,9) R91:,-5)<-9/6)R11:I:)$!!(

Appendices

Page 87 of 192

O:612,9) R91:,-5)<-9/6)R11:I:)$!((

R91:,-5)$!((

A:9:;:)$!((

Appendix 2.10: Share of Workforce by Industr y, Eastern Ontario Only – Minus Ottawa (2001 & 2011) !"!# $"!# %"!# &"!# ‘"!# (!"!# ($"!# (%"!# (&"!# (’"!# (()+,-./01/,23)45,261,73)4-68-9+):9;)8/91-9+ $()<-9-9+3)=/:,,7-9+3):9;)5-0):9;)+:6)2>1,:.1-59 $$)?1-0-1-26 $@)A5961,/.1-59 @(B@@)<:9/4:.1/,-9+ %()C85026:02)1,:;2 %%B%D)E21:-0)1,:;2 %‘B%F)G,:96H5,1:1-59):9;)I:,285/6-9+ D()J945,K:1-59):9;)./01/,:0)-9;/61,-26 D$)L-9:9.2):9;)-96/,:9.2 D@)E2:0)261:12) :9;),291:0) :9;)02:6-9+ D%)M,54266-59:03)6.-291-4-.):9;)12.89-.:0)62,N-.26 DD)<:9:+2K291) 54).5KH:9-26):9;)2912,H,-626 D&);K-9-61,:1-N2):9;)6/HH5,13)I:612)K:9:+2K291) :9;),2K2;-:1-59) 62,N-.26 &()O;/.:1-59:0)62,N-.26 &$)P2:018).:,2):9;)65.-:0):66-61:9.2 Q(),163)2912,1:-9K291) :9;),2.,2:1-59 Q$)..5KK5;:1-59):9;)455;)62,N-.26 ‘()R182,)62,N-.26)S2>.2H1)H/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59U F()M/T0-.):;K-9-61,:1-59

O:612,9) R91:,-5)<-9/6)R11:I:)$!!(

O:612,9) R91:,-5)<-9/6)R11:I:)$!((

Appendices

Page 88 of 192

Appendix 2.11: Share of Workforce by Occupation (2001, 2011 & Ontario/Canada 2011)

!"!#

$"!#

%!"!#

%$"!#

&!"!#

N)-(C4=.&!%%

E()(<(.&!%%

‘()(*+,+)-. /!0

1234)+33./%0

564+)6+3./&0

7+(8-9./:0

;<26(-4=).>.?(@./A0

BC-3D.E28-2C+.>.F+6. /$0

5(8+3. /G0

HC(<+3. /I0

J(-2C(8.F+3=2C6+3D.B*./K0

‘()2L./M0

;(3-+C). N)-(C4=.&!!%

Appendices

Page 89 of 192

;(3-+C). N)-(C4=.&!%%

&$"!#

Appendix 2.12: Share of Workforce by Occupation, Eastern Ontario Only (2001 & 2011)

!"!#

$"!#

%!"!#

%$"!#

&!"!#

&$"!#

‘()(*+,+)-. /!0

1234)+33./%0

564+)6+3./&0

7+(8-9./:0

;<26(-4=).>.?(@./A0

BC-3D.E28-2C+.>.F+6. /$0

5(8+3. /G0

HC(<+3. /I0

J(-2C(8.F+3=2C6+3D.B*./K0

‘()2L./M0

;(3-+C). N)-(C4=.&!!%

;(3-+C). N)-(C4=.&!%%

Appendices

Page 90 of 192

Appendix 2.13: Share of Workforce by Occupation- Minus Ottawa (2001 & 2011)

!"!#

$"!#

%!"!#

%$"!#

&!"!#

&$"!#

‘!"!#

())+,-,./ 0!1

2345*,44/0%1

675,*7,4/0&1

8,)9.:/0'1

;<37).5=*/>/?)@/0A1

BC.4D/E39.3C,/>/F,7/ 0$1

6)9,4/ 0G1

HC)<,4/ 0I1

J).3C)9/F,4=3C7,4D/B+/0K1

()*3L/0M1

;)4.,C*/ N*.)C5=/(5*34/N..)@)/&!!%

Appendices

Page 91 of 192

;)4.,C*/ N*.)C5=/(5*34/N..)@)/&!%%

N*.)C5=/&!%%

E)*)<)/&!%%

Appendix 2.14: Share of Workforce by Occupation, Eastern Ontario - Minus Ottawa Only (2001 & 2011) !"!#

$"!#

%!"!#

%$"!#

&!"!#

&$"!#

‘!"!#

())+,-,./ 0!1

2345*,44/0%1

675,*7,4/0&1

8,)9.:/0'1

;<37).5=*/>/?)@/0A1

BC.4D/E39.3C,/>/F,7/ 0$1

6)9,4/ 0G1

HC)<,4/ 0I1

J).3C)9/F,4=3C7,4D/B+/0K1

()*3L/0M1

;)4.,C*/ N*.)C5=/(5*34/N..)@)/&!!%

;)4.,C*/ N*.)C5=/(5*34/N..)@)/&!%%

Appendices

Page 92 of 192

Appendix 2.15: Immigrant Status & Period

Immigrated when?

CD_Name

GNR

NonImmigrant

Immigrant

Before 1991

1991 or later

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

92.7%

7.3%

4.9%

2.4%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

95.5%

4.5%

2.6%

1.9%

Ottawa

21.8

75.3%

24.7%

10.4%

14.3%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

92.9%

7.1%

5.2%

1.9%

Lanark

39.1

93.5%

6.5%

5.0%

1.5%

Frontenac

29.2

87.3%

12.7%

8.0%

4.7%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

93.2%

6.8%

5.9%

0.9%

Hastings

32.4

93.2%

6.8%

5.1%

1.7%

Prince Edward

37.3

91.1%

8.9%

7.5%

1.4%

Northumberland

36.3

89.5%

10.5%

9.1%

1.4%

Peterborough

38.1

91.5%

8.5%

6.3%

2.2%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

92.1%

7.9%

6.7%

1.2%

Haliburton

47.9

89.8%

10.2%

9.3%

0.9%

Renfrew

33.8

94.7%

5.3%

3.9%

1.4%

Eastern Ontario

84.6%

15.4%

7.9%

7.5%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

92.0%

8.0%

5.9%

2.1%

Ontario

27.1

70.4%

29.6%

13.6%

16.0%

Canada

26.1

78.3%

21.7%

9.4%

12.3%

Appendices

Page 93 of 192

Appendix 2.16: Immigration Source Region CD_Name

GNR

Americas

Europe

Africa

Asia

Oceania and other

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

17.5%

57.2%

2.2%

22.6%

0.6%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

23.9%

51.1%

10.2%

14.1%

0.7%

Ottawa

21.8

15.6%

28.5%

12.6%

43.0%

0.4%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

19.3%

65.6%

2.1%

12.1%

0.9%

Lanark

39.1

21.2%

64.7%

2.4%

10.5%

1.3%

Frontenac

29.2

17.6%

54.8%

3.8%

23.2%

0.6%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

16.1%

76.8%

0.9%

5.6%

0.4%

Hastings

32.4

16.4%

67.3%

2.0%

14.0%

0.4%

Prince Edward

37.3

12.2%

76.5%

1.6%

9.2%

0.0%

Northumberland

36.3

12.6%

76.7%

1.1%

8.6%

1.1%

Peterborough

38.1

14.9%

65.8%

2.8%

15.6%

0.9%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

11.4%

75.4%

2.3%

10.3%

0.8%

Haliburton

47.9

19.8%

73.2%

0.0%

6.7%

0.0%

Renfrew

33.8

18.8%

62.8%

2.0%

14.9%

1.6%

Eastern Ontario

15.9%

39.1%

9.7%

34.8%

0.5%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

16.7%

64.5%

2.7%

15.3%

0.8%

Ontario

27.1

16.1%

33.4%

5.4%

44.8%

0.3%

Canada

26.1

15.6%

31.4%

7.3%

44.9%

0.8%

Appendices

Page 94 of 192

Appendix 2.17: Generation Status

CD_Name

GNR

First generation

Second generation

Third generation or more

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

7.5%

10.9%

81.7%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

4.7%

6.5%

88.8%

Ottawa

21.8

25.4%

20.3%

54.4%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

7.4%

13.1%

79.5%

Lanark

39.1

6.7%

12.1%

81.1%

Frontenac

29.2

13.4%

16.0%

70.6%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

7.1%

12.5%

80.4%

Hastings

32.4

7.1%

12.8%

80.1%

Prince Edward

37.3

9.2%

12.4%

78.4%

Northumberland

36.3

10.9%

15.7%

73.3%

Peterborough

38.1

8.7%

14.7%

76.6%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

8.0%

15.0%

77.0%

Haliburton

47.9

10.4%

14.9%

74.8%

Renfrew

33.8

5.6%

9.3%

85.1%

Eastern Ontario

15.8%

16.1%

68.1%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

8.3%

12.8%

78.9%

Ontario

27.1

29.9%

22.5%

47.6%

Canada

26.1

22.0%

17.4%

60.7%

Appendices

Page 95 of 192

Appendix 2.18: Aboriginal Identity CD_Name

GNR

Aboriginal identity

Non-Aboriginal identity

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

2.9%

97.1%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

2.7%

97.3%

Ottawa

21.8

2.1%

97.9%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

2.5%

97.5%

Lanark

39.1

3.7%

96.3%

Frontenac

29.2

3.3%

96.7%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

3.8%

96.2%

Hastings

32.4

6.0%

94.0%

Prince Edward

37.3

2.5%

97.5%

Northumberland

36.3

2.4%

97.6%

Peterborough

38.1

3.6%

96.4%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

1.9%

98.1%

Haliburton

47.9

1.8%

98.2%

Renfrew

33.8

7.5%

92.5%

Eastern Ontario

3.0%

97.0%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

3.7%

96.3%

Ontario

27.1

2.4%

97.6%

Canada

26.1

4.3%

95.7%

Appendices

Page 96 of 192

Appendix 2.19: Mobility Over the Past 1 Year

Over the Past 5 years

Moved

Did Not Move

Moved

Did Not Move

32.8

10.4%

89.6%

32.9%

67.1%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

11.4%

88.6%

36.3%

63.7%

Ottawa

21.8

13.5%

86.5%

41.9%

58.1%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

10.3%

89.7%

32.7%

67.3%

Lanark

39.1

9.9%

90.1%

34.6%

65.4%

Frontenac

29.2

14.2%

85.8%

41.9%

58.1%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

9.3%

90.7%

30.8%

69.2%

Hastings

32.4

11.3%

88.7%

35.3%

64.7%

Prince Edward

37.3

8.6%

91.4%

30.2%

69.8%

Northumberland

36.3

10.9%

89.2%

33.0%

67.0%

Peterborough

38.1

11.9%

88.1%

35.7%

64.3%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

8.5%

91.5%

28.6%

71.4%

Haliburton

47.9

9.2%

90.8%

30.1%

69.9%

Renfrew

33.8

11.5%

88.5%

34.7%

65.3%

Eastern Ontario

12.2%

87.8%

37.9%

62.1%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

11.1%

88.9%

34.8%

65.2%

CD_Name

GNR

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

Ontario

27.1

11.6%

88.4%

37.5%

62.5%

Canada

26.1

12.4%

87.6%

38.6%

61.4%

The education level numbersabove are for current residents. So those that moved, moved into or within the region. For the previous year (2010 since this is from the 2011 Household Sur vey), the number of people within the region that moved is pretty similar to Ontario and close to the Canadian average. Keep in mind, the move could be across town, around the region, within the province, outside the province, within or outside Canada.

Appendices

Page 97 of 192

Appendix 2.20: Education Levels

CD_Name

GNR

Not HS

HS Only

Post-Sec or College

Bachelors

Graduate

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

24.3%

30.1%

35.6%

6.4%

3.6%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

22.4%

29.9%

34.0%

9.4%

4.3%

Ottawa

21.8

12.9%

23.4%

28.2%

20.8%

14.6%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

19.6%

29.4%

37.1%

9.3%

4.6%

Lanark

39.1

18.8%

29.2%

36.9%

9.9%

5.2%

Frontenac

29.2

15.8%

26.7%

33.4%

12.9%

11.3%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

22.8%

28.1%

37.8%

7.5%

3.8%

Hastings

32.4

23.5%

30.2%

35.5%

7.3%

3.5%

Prince Edward

37.3

21.1%

26.6%

37.2%

9.4%

5.7%

Northumberland

36.3

19.1%

29.9%

36.7%

9.2%

5.1%

Peterborough

38.1

19.5%

28.3%

35.5%

9.9%

6.7%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

22.3%

30.9%

35.9%

6.9%

4.0%

Haliburton

47.9

22.4%

27.6%

37.5%

7.3%

5.3%

Renfrew

33.8

21.4%

31.1%

35.1%

8.1%

4.3%

Eastern Ontario

17.3%

26.7%

32.4%

14.2%

9.5%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

20.7%

29.3%

35.6%

9.0%

5.5%

Ontario

27.1

18.7%

26.8%

31.2%

14.5%

8.9%

Canada

26.1

20.1%

25.6%

33.5%

13.3%

7.5%

Appendices

Page 98 of 192

Appendix 2.21: Industr y Mix

CD_Name

GNR

Agric, Mine, Util (11, 21, 22)

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

5.2%

8.0%

11.7%

22.8%

1.4%

4.1%

9.8%

6.1%

12.1%

1.8%

5.2%

12.0%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

4.4%

10.8%

7.2%

19.0%

1.5%

4.3%

7.6%

8.3%

11.1%

1.9%

3.8%

20.1%

Ottawa

21.8

0.9%

4.3%

3.5%

15.6%

2.8%

5.2%

13.8%

7.6%

10.2%

1.8%

6.2%

28.0%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

3.7%

8.0%

11.2%

22.3%

1.3%

3.6%

9.8%

6.1%

12.0%

2.8%

5.9%

13.2%

Lanark

39.1

3.3%

9.9%

9.5%

20.3%

1.7%

4.1%

11.2%

5.7%

13.6%

2.1%

5.3%

13.1%

Frontenac

29.2

1.6%

6.1%

4.7%

16.6%

1.6%

4.8%

9.1%

14.9%

14.0%

1.9%

8.4%

16.4%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

4.4%

10.3%

9.4%

20.7%

1.1%

4.3%

7.2%

6.7%

12.9%

1.5%

5.6%

15.9%

Hastings

32.4

3.0%

7.4%

11.0%

22.8%

1.4%

3.6%

8.8%

7.1%

11.5%

1.6%

6.2%

15.8%

Prince Edward

37.3

8.8%

8.4%

18.0%

1.9%

3.9%

9.3%

5.6%

13.9%

2.2%

7.5%

11.9%

Northumberla nd

36.3

6.7%

8.4%

13.6%

18.0%

1.5%

3.3%

9.8%

7.8%

11.3%

2.3%

5.6%

11.6%

Peterborough

38.1

3.7%

7.5%

8.7%

20.2%

1.9%

4.8%

9.9%

8.9%

13.3%

2.7%

6.9%

11.5%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

5.8%

9.4%

8.7%

22.5%

1.1%

4.3%

7.9%

11.3%

2.6%

5.4%

12.9%

Haliburton

47.9

3.5%

14.0%

3.9%

21.9%

2.3%

5.5%

8.3%

6.1%

12.4%

2.4%

8.8%

10.8%

Renfrew

33.8

5.0%

7.3%

8.0%

17.0%

1.7%

3.1%

11.2%

6.1%

11.7%

1.5%

6.0%

21.5%

Eastern Ontario

2.6%

6.4%

6.5%

18.0%

2.1%

4.6%

11.4%

7.9%

11.4%

1.9%

6.2%

21.0%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

4.1%

8.2%

9.1%

20.0%

1.5%

4.1%

9.4%

8.2%

12.4%

2.1%

6.1%

14.9%

Constr (23)

Manuf (31-33)

Trade, Trans (41, 44-45, 48-49)

Info (51)

FIRE (52, 53)

Prof Svcs (54, 55, 56)

Education (61)

Healt hcare (62)

Arts & Rec (71)

Acco mm (72)

Other (81,91 )

Ontario

27.1

2.8%

6.3%

10.4%

20.4%

2.7%

7.5%

12.4%

7.5%

10.4%

2.2%

6.3%

11.3%

Canada

26.1

4.8%

6.9%

9.2%

20.4%

2.4%

6.2%

11.3%

7.4%

11.1%

2.1%

6.4%

11.8%

Appendices

Page 99 of 192

Appendix 2.22: Occupational Mix

CD_Name

GNR

Management (0)

Business (1)

Sciences (2)

Health (3)

Education & Law (4)

Arts, Culture & Rec (5)

Sales (6)

Trades (7)

Natural Res & Ag (8)

Manuf (9)

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

10.5%

14.1%

4.2%

6.5%

11.2%

1.7%

23.9%

18.2%

2.7%

7.1%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

12.4%

19.1%

6.2%

5.3%

12.6%

1.8%

18.9%

18.0%

2.2%

3.4%

Ottawa

21.8

12.5%

19.4%

12.7%

5.9%

15.8%

3.7%

20.8%

7.1%

0.8%

1.2%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

11.1%

14.3%

6.4%

7.2%

10.7%

2.0%

23.5%

15.8%

3.1%

5.8%

Lanark

39.1

11.9%

15.9%

6.8%

11.0%

2.5%

23.1%

16.2%

1.9%

4.0%

Frontenac

29.2

10.4%

14.5%

5.9%

8.3%

19.1%

2.9%

24.3%

11.6%

1.0%

1.9%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

9.9%

14.4%

5.1%

6.8%

12.7%

1.9%

23.3%

19.1%

2.1%

4.9%

Hastings

32.4

10.6%

12.8%

4.5%

6.2%

13.7%

2.3%

23.6%

17.6%

1.8%

7.0%

Prince Edward

37.3

13.0%

11.0%

4.1%

7.4%

11.4%

3.8%

21.9%

17.9%

4.5%

5.1%

Northumberland

36.3

11.7%

12.7%

4.6%

5.6%

12.5%

2.8%

21.6%

16.8%

3.5%

8.2%

Peterborough

38.1

10.0%

13.7%

5.7%

7.7%

13.7%

2.6%

25.2%

14.8%

1.9%

4.7%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

12.2%

13.4%

3.4%

7.3%

12.2%

1.8%

21.7%

19.8%

3.4%

4.6%

Haliburton

47.9

13.8%

3.8%

6.4%

10.0%

2.2%

21.8%

21.5%

3.7%

3.0%

Renfrew

33.8

11.0%

11.8%

6.2%

6.8%

17.5%

1.9%

23.5%

14.4%

2.2%

4.7%

Eastern Ontario

11.7%

16.6%

8.8%

6.4%

14.7%

3.0%

22.1%

12.0%

1.6%

3.2%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

11.0%

14.1%

5.4%

6.9%

13.7%

2.3%

23.1%

16.2%

2.3%

5.0%

Ontario

27.1

11.5%

17.0%

7.4%

5.9%

12.0%

3.1%

23.2%

13.0%

1.6%

5.2%

Canada

26.1

11.2%

16.5%

7.0%

6.3%

11.7%

2.9%

23.1%

14.4%

2.3%

4.6%

Appendices

Page 100 of 192

Appendix 2.23: Employment: Full-Time/Par t-Time

GNR

Worked Full-Time

CD_Name

GNR

Worked Full-Time

Worked PartTime

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

79.1%

20.9%

Prescott and Russell

24.5

81.2%

18.8%

Ottawa

21.8

80.3%

19.7%

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

77.9%

22.1%

Lanark

39.1

76.5%

23.5%

Frontenac

29.2

77.5%

22.5%

Lennox and Addington

33.0

80.1%

19.9%

Hastings

32.4

76.9%

23.1%

Prince Edward

37.3

74.7%

25.3%

Northumberland

36.3

76.4%

23.6%

Peterborough

38.1

75.2%

24.8%

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

77.4%

22.6%

Haliburton

47.9

77.4%

22.6%

Renfrew

33.8

78.8%

21.2%

Eastern Ontario

78.9%

21.1%

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

77.7%

22.3%

Ontario

27.1

85.8%

14.2%

Canada

26.1

86.6%

13.4%

Appendices

Page 101 of 192

Appendix 2.24: Employment Status: Full-Year/Par t-Year

CD_Name

GNR

Worked Full-Year

Worked PartYear

Average weeks worked in 2010

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

67.9%

32.1%

44.9

Prescott and Russell

24.5

69.3%

30.7%

45.6

Ottawa

21.8

68.1%

31.9%

45.2

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

69.6%

30.4%

45.2

Lanark

39.1

68.5%

31.5%

45.0

Frontenac

29.2

64.2%

35.8%

44.2

Lennox and Addington

33.0

70.7%

29.3%

45.6

Hastings

32.4

67.3%

32.7%

44.8

Prince Edward

37.3

64.9%

35.1%

44.1

Northumberland

36.3

66.5%

33.5%

44.5

Peterborough

38.1

68.1%

31.9%

44.9

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

67.9%

32.1%

44.9

Haliburton

47.9

59.1%

40.9%

43.2

Renfrew

33.8

67.6%

32.4%

45.1

Eastern Ontario

67.8%

32.2%

45.0

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

67.5%

32.5%

44.9

Ontario

27.1

66.3%

33.7%

44.8

Canada

26.1

64.1%

35.9%

44.5

Appendices

Page 102 of 192

Appendix 2.25: Average Income

CD_Name

GNR

Average Individual income ($)

Average family income ($)

Average household total income ($)

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

32.8

34,820

77,767

65,821

Prescott and Russell

24.5

41,018

93,624

81,709

Ottawa

21.8

49,826

116,630

96,815

Leeds and Grenville

37.8

38,319

86,149

74,019

Lanark

39.1

39,356

88,596

76,485

Frontenac

29.2

40,983

94,699

77,109

Lennox and Addington

33.0

36,125

80,727

71,385

Hastings

32.4

34,432

76,690

65,693

Prince Edward

37.3

39,945

92,440

78,710

Northumberland

36.3

38,231

86,119

74,998

Peterborough

38.1

37,288

84,994

72,033

Kawartha Lakes

40.8

36,873

83,541

72,694

Haliburton

47.9

35,510

79,816

67,564

Renfrew

33.8

37,131

82,289

70,546

Eastern Ontario

43,000

98,343

83,144

Eastern Ontario minus Ottawa

37,703

85,160

72,651

Ontario

27.1

40,650

94,125

79,102

Canada

26.1

42,264

100,152

85,772

Appendices

Page 103 of 192

Data presented below is from Magnet/Vicinity Jobs and reflects real-time labour market data from the first quar ter of 2016, Januar y-March, and is repor ted either by month or totalled across the three months. Appendix 2.25: New resumes posted (1Q 2016) D0E%809:;09%=5960F%<+G%’$+&A )&#$$$%

+’#$$$%

)(#$$$% )’#$$$% “#$$$%

)$#$$$% &”#$$$%

&#$$$% &&#$$$% (#$$$%

&(#$$$%

456-7%809:;09%<=35>?.@0A

456-7%809:;09%<B-9603.%C.6-3?5A

+$#$$$%

&’#$$$% ‘#$$$% &$#$$$% *

,-.

/01 B-9603.% C.6-3?5

!"#$$$%

2-3

2?.:9%C66-E-

C.6-3?5

Appendix 2.26 shows the number of new resumes posted each month by region of residence. While the number of posted resumes doesn’t guarantee that someone is unemployed, it does indicate that they are at least actively looking for a new job. The data is only from a single source, indeed, but it is the most used in Canada and assures that job-seekers are counted only once. Appendix 2.26: New Resumes Posted by Location and Month (1Q 2016) Region

Jan

Feb

Mar

Total Jan-Mar

Worked in 2010

New Resumes per 1,000

Frontenac

506

514

493

1,513

75,325

20.09

Haliburton

7,220

2.91

Hastings

320

258

303

881

62,975

13.99

Kawartha Lakes

138

121

145

404

34,335

11.77

Lanark

197

169

133

499

33,375

14.95

Leeds and Grenville

273

254

203

730

49,140

14.86

Lennox and Addington

146

19,695

7.41

Northumberland

2,710

2,269

2,309

7,288

39,080

186.49

Ottawa

4.581

3,850

4,036

12,467

474,940

26.25

Peterborough

511

425

511

1,447

63,755

22.70

Prescott and Russell

184

46,250

3.98

Prince Edward

11,355

2.91

Appendices

Page 104 of 192

Region

Jan

Feb

Mar

Total Jan-Mar

Worked in 2010

New Resumes per 1,000

Renfrew

190

169

528

49,390

10.69

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

227

170

196

593

52,865

11.22

Eastern Ontario

9,780

8,328

8,626

26,734

1,019,700

26.22

Minus Ottawa

5,199

4,478

4,590

14,267

544,760

26.19

Ontario

74,351

66,204

64,434

204,989

3,355,645

61.09

Appendix 2.27: New jobs posted (Q1 2016)

627%.839% ;89A2C%:+D%,$+&? !)"$$$%

‘"$$$%

!("#$$%

&"$$$%

#"$$$%

!’"#$$%

!"$$$%

!’"$$$%

-"$$$%

!&"#$$% !&"$$$%

,"$$$%

627%.839%:;58<=0>2?

627%.839%:@/9A250%B0A/5=8?

!("$$$%

!#"#$$% +"$$$%

!#"$$$%

./0

123 @/9A250% B0A/5=8

4=0E9%BAA/7/

4/5

!!"#$$%

B0A/5=8

New jobs are collected across a wide variety of job posting websites and extensive effor ts are under taken to eliminate duplicates. (See Magnet/Vicinity Jobs for details.)

Appendices

Page 105 of 192

Appendix 2.28: New Jobs Posted by Location and Month Total Jan-Mar

Worked in 2010

New Jobs per 1,000

515

1,416

75,325

18.80

7,220

3.74

189

172

202

563

62,975

8.94

Kawartha Lakes

224

34,335

6.52

Lanark

126

183

395

33,375

11.84

Leeds and Grenville

142

110

138

390

49,140

7.94

Lennox and Addington

19,695

3.35

Northumberland

1,125

930

1,047

3,102

39,080

79.38

Ottawa

3,659

3,710

3,486

10,855

474,940

22.86

Peterborough

311

253

297

861

63,755

13.50

Prescott and Russell

175

46,250

3.78

Prince Edward

196

11,355

17.26

Renfrew

103

266

49,390

5.39

Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry

142

139

155

436

52,865

8.25

Eastern Ontario

6,421

6,171

6,380

18,972

1,019,700

18.61

Minus Ottawa

2,762

2,461

2,894

8,117

544,760

14.90

Ontario

47,881

46,181

48,696

142,758

3,355645

42.54

Region

Jan

Feb

Frontenac

478

423

Haliburton

Hastings

Mar

Location is based on the location of the job as repor ted in the posting. Individual towns and cities have been summarized to the Census Division (CD) level, which are typically cities, counties or united counties. Appendices

Page 106 of 192

Appendix 2.29: New Jobs Posted by Industr y

W2X(Y5U6( U7(L9;/61,7 !"!#

$"!#

%!"!#

%$"!#

%%() *+,-./01/,23(45,261,73(4-68-9+(:9;(</91-9+ &%() =-9-9+(:9;(>-0(:9;(?:6(@A1,:.1-59 &&() B1-0-1-26 &’() C5961,/.1-59 ‘%)’’() =:9/D:.1/,-9+ E%() F85 026:02(G,:;2 EE)E$() H21:-0(G,:;2 EI)EJ() G,:96K5,1:1-59 $%() L9D5,M:1-59(:9;(C/01/,:0(L9;/61,-26 $&() 4-9:9.2(:9;(L96/,:9.2 $’() H2:0(@61:12(:9;(H291:0( :9;(N2:6-9+ $E() O,5D266-59:03(P.-291-D-.(:9;(G2.89-.:0(P2,Q-.26 $$() =:9:+2M291(5D(C5MK:9-26(:9;(@912,K,-626 $R() *;M-9-61,:1-Q2(:9;(P/KK5,13(F:612(=:9:+2M291( :9;(H2M2;-:1-5 9( P2,Q-.26 R%() @;/.:1-59:0(P2,Q-.26 R&() <2:018(C:,2(:9;(P5.-:0(*66-61:9.2 S%() ,163(@912,1:-9M291(:9;(H2.,2:1-59 S&() ..5MM5;:1-59(:9;(455;(P2,Q-.26 I%() >182,(P2,Q-.26(T2A.2K1(O/U0-.(;M-9-61,:1-59V J%() O/U0-.(;M-9-61,:1-59 @:612,9( >91:,-5

Appendices

Page 107 of 192

=-9/6(>11:X:

91:,-5

&!"!#

&$"!#

‘!"!#

Appendix 2.30: New Jobs by Industr y (1Q 2016)

Industry/Sector

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting

0.0%

0.1%

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction

0.0%

0.4%

22 - Utilities

0.3%

0.6%

0.5%

23 - Construction

0.5%

0.4%

0.9%

31-33 - Manufacturing

9.8%

9.6%

9.5%

41 - Wholesale Trade

1.3%

1.0%

2.0%

44-45 - Retail Trade

22.7%

24.5%

19.9%

48-49 - Transportation

1.8%

1.9%

1.6%

51 - Information and Cultural Industries

3.9%

1.9%

5.5%

52 - Finance and Insurance

9.4%

8.4%

17.2%

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

1.9%

2.8%

1.9%

54 - Professional, Scientiﬁc and Technical Services

14.2%

6.0%

13.0%

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises

0.0%

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services

1.2%

1.0%

1.4%

61 - Educational Services

6.5%

5.3%

3.8%

62 - Health Care and Social Assistance

15.2%

23.8%

10.6%

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation

1.3%

1.1%

2.2%

72 - Accommodation and Food Services

4.2%

4.5%

4.1%

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration)

0.9%

0.3%

0.7%

91 - Public Administration

4.9%

7.1%

4.8%

Appendices

Page 108 of 192

Appendix 2.31: New Jobs (2016) & Existing Jobs (2011) by Industr y New Jobs

Existing Jobs

Industry/Sector

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

Eastern ON

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

11 - Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting

0.0%

0.1%

1.7%

2.8%

1.5%

21 - Mining and Oil and Gas Extraction

0.0%

0.4%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

22 - Utilities

0.3%

0.6%

0.5%

0.7%

1.0%

0.9%

23 - Construction

0.5%

0.4%

0.9%

6.4%

8.2%

6.3%

31-33 - Manufacturing

9.8%

9.6%

9.5%

6.5%

9.1%

10.4%

41 - Wholesale Trade

1.3%

1.0%

2.0%

2.9%

3.2%

4.6%

44-45 - Retail Trade

22.7%

24.5%

19.9%

11.4%

12.7%

11.2%

48-49 - Transportation

1.8%

1.9%

1.6%

3.6%

4.1%

4.6%

51 - Information and Cultural Industries

3.9%

1.9%

5.5%

2.1%

1.5%

2.7%

52 - Finance and Insurance

9.4%

8.4%

17.2%

3.0%

2.5%

5.5%

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

1.9%

2.8%

1.9%

1.6%

2.0%

54 - Professional, Scientiﬁc and Technical Services

14.2%

6.0%

13.0%

7.2%

4.8%

7.6%

55 - Management of Companies and Enterprises

0.0%

0.1%

56 - Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services

1.2%

1.0%

1.4%

4.2%

4.6%

61 - Educational Services

6.5%

5.3%

3.8%

7.9%

8.2%

7.5%

62 - Health Care and Social Assistance

15.2%

23.8%

10.6%

11.4%

12.4%

10.4%

71 - Arts, Entertainment and Recreation

1.3%

1.1%

2.2%

1.9%

2.1%

2.2%

72 - Accommodation and Food Services

4.2%

4.5%

4.1%

6.2%

6.1%

6.3%

81 - Other Services (except Public Administration)

0.9%

0.3%

0.7%

4.5%

4.4%

91 - Public Administration

4.9%

7.1%

4.8%

16.5%

10.5%

6.9%

The table above compares the share of new jobs by industr y with the share of existing jobs in those same industries. 83

Appendices

Page 109 of 192

Appendix 2.32: New Jobs Posted by Occupation Group

<.B(N1O6( OC(A2234+051, !"!#

$"!#

%!"!# %$"!# &!"!# &$"!# ‘!"!# ‘$"!#

!() *+,+-./.,0( 12234+051,6

%() 7365,.668(95,+,2.(+,:(+:/5,560;+051,(12234+051,6

&() <+03;+=(+,:(+44=5.:(625.,2.6(+,:(;.=+0.:(12234+051,6

‘() >.+=0?(12234+051,6

@() A2234+051,6(5,(.:32+051,8(=+B(+,:(6125+=8(21//3,50C( +,:(-1D.;,/.,0( 6.;D52.6

$() A2234+051,6(5,(+;08(23=03;.8(;.2;.+051,(+,:(641;0

E() F+=.6(+,:(6.;D52.(12234+051,6

G() H;+:.68(0;+,641;0(+,:(.I354/.,0(14.;+01;6(+,:( ;.=+0.:( 12234+051,6 J() <+03;+=(;.613;2.68(+-;523=03;.(+,:(;.=+0.:( 4;1:32051,( 12234+051,6

K() A2234+051,6(5,(/+,39+203;5,-(+,:(305=505.6

A0?.;(L( M,5:.,0595.:

P+60.;,( A,0+;51

*5,36(A00+B+

A,0+;51

Appendices

Page 110 of 192

Appendix 2.33: New Jobs (1Q 2016)

Occupation Group (ﬁrst NOCS digit)

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

0 - Management occupations

9.9%

8.9%

10.2%

1 - Business, ﬁnance and administration occupations

10.4%

8.2%

10.1%

2 - Natural and applied sciences and related occupations

9.7%

4.7%

9.0%

3 - Health occupations

6.4%

10.9%

4.6%

4 - Occupations in education, law and social, community and government services

4.7%

5.8%

4.4%

5 - Occupations in art, culture, recreation and sport

1.7%

1.2%

1.7%

6 - Sales and service occupations

20.0%

23.6%

19.2%

7 - Trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations

3.7%

5.6%

5.5%

8 - Natural resources, agriculture and related production occupations

0.4%

0.5%

0.9%

9 - Occupations in manufacturing and utilities

1.3%

1.9%

1.8%

Other / Unidentiﬁed

31.9%

28.7%

32.7%

Appendix 2.34: New Jobs (2016) & Existing Jobs (2011) New Jobs Occupation Group (ﬁrst NOCS digit)

Eastern Ontario

Existing Jobs Minus Ottawa

Ontario

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

0 - Management occupations

14.5%

12.5%

15.2%

11.7%

11.0%

11.5%

1 - Business, ﬁnance and administration occupations

15.3%

11.5%

15.0%

16.6%

14.1%

17.0%

2 - Natural and applied sciences and related occupations

14.2%

6.6%

13.3%

8.8%

5.4%

7.4%

3 - Health occupations

9.4%

15.3%

6.9%

6.4%

6.9%

5.9%

4 - Occupations in education, law and social, community and government services

6.8%

8.2%

6.5%

14.7%

13.7%

12.0%

5 - Occupations in art, culture, recreation and sport

2.5%

1.7%

2.5%

3.0%

2.3%

3.1%

6 - Sales and service occupations

29.4%

33.1%

28.6%

22.1%

23.1%

23.2%

7 - Trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations

5.5%

7.8%

8.2%

12.0%

16.2%

13.0%

8 - Natural resources, agriculture and related production occupations

0.6%

0.7%

1.3%

1.6%

2.3%

1.6%

9 - Occupations in manufacturing and utilities

1.9%

2.6%

3.2%

5.0%

5.2%

Other / Unidentiﬁed (excluded for comparison)

The table above compares the share of new jobs by occupational group with the share of existing jobs in those same occupations. (Other/unidentified are removed and the shares recalculated using only those jobs with a clearly identifiable occupational group.) 85

Appendices

Page 111 of 192

Appendix 2.35: New Jobs by Education/Skill Required

J/QR9I1 I3456782-9,CBP-« M/N6-0/L/,21 !"!#

$"!#

%!"!# %$"!# &!"!# &$"!# ‘!"!# ‘$"!#

()* +,-./01-23*456782-9,

:);9«/=/ 90*>9782-9,8<456782-9,90(??0/,2-7/1@-? A08-,-,=

;)B/79,5803B7@99<8,5C90D776?82-9,EB?/7-F-7*A08-,-,=

G)D,E2@/EH9IA08-,-,=90J9*K90L8<*456782-9,*M/N6-0/5

O)* +,P,9Q,

4812/0,* D,280-9

S-,61*D228Q8

D,280-9

Appendix 2.36: Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

A: University Education

26.9%

23.5%

25.0%

B: College or Vocational Education or Apprenticeship Training

15.4%

16.8%

16.1%

C: Secondary School and/or Occupation-Speciﬁc Training

18.5%

22.0%

18.3%

D: On-the-job Training or No Formal Education Required

7.3%

9.1%

7.9%

Z: Unknown

31.9%

28.8%

32.8%

Appendix 2.37: Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed (not including “unknown”) Highest Education/Skill Requirement Listed (unknown excluded)

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ottawa

Ontario

A: University Education

39.5%

32.9%

44.8%

37.2%

B: College or Vocational Education or Apprenticeship Training

22.6%

23.5%

21.8%

23.9%

C: Secondary School and/or Occupation-Speciﬁc Training

27.2%

30.8%

24.2%

27.2%

D: On-the-job Training or No Formal Education Required

10.8%

12.7%

9.2%

11.8%

Appendices

Page 112 of 192

Appendix 2.38: New Jobs by Full-Time Status

32:6?4@A6 @B6+,–./0126 C5D5,A !"!#

$!"!#

%!"!#

&!"!#

‘!"!#

(!"!#

)!"!#

*!"!#

+,–./012

3456+,–./012

78984:86;63456<=2850>02=

EDA52F86 G85DF04

H08,A6G55D:D

G85DF04

Appendix 2.39: New Jobs (1Q 2016) Full-Time Status

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

Full-Time

24.6%

24.9%

30.3%

Not Full-Time

11.4%

14.6%

10.3%

Unknown / Not Identiﬁed

64.0%

60.4%

59.4%

Full-time status cannot be determined for around 6 in 10 newly posted jobs. It is likely that most of them would be full-time positions since a job posting for a par t-time job would be much more likely to indicate that it is par t-time in the job posting. In this case, unknown jobs will be ignored which is the same effect as assuming the split in unknown jobs is the same as known jobs (around 3:1, full-time to not full-time). Additionally, full-time includes only those jobs that are strictly full-time. Jobs that are identified as “full-time or par t-time” are counted as “not full-time.” The result is that these estimates should be expected to under-estimate the share of jobs that are full-time. But, this approach gives the most conser vative estimate and had been consistently applied across the various geographies.

Appendices

Page 113 of 192

Appendix 2.40: New Jobs Unknown/Not Identified–excluded for comparison (1Q 2016) New Jobs

Existing Jobs

Full-Time Status

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

Eastern Ontario

Minus Ottawa

Ontario

Full-Time

68.3%

63.0%

74.7%

78.90%

77.70%

85.80%

Not Full-Time

31.7%

37.0%

25.3%

21.10%

22.30%

14.20%

Unknown / Not Identiﬁed – excluded for comparison

Appendices

Page 114 of 192

Elements Of The Eastern Ontario Innovation Ecosystem

Trent University

Peterborough

Research, Talent

Queen’s University

Kingston

Research, Talent

St. Lawrence College

Kingston, Cornwall, Brockville

Applied Research, Talent

Sir Sanford Fleming College

Peterborough

Applied Research and Talent

Loyalist College

Belleville

Applied Research and Talent

Chalk River Nuclear Power

Chalk River

Research

First Stone Partners Incubator

Picton

Incubator

Sustainability Capacity Centre

Perth

Incubator

Queen’s Innovation Connector

Kingston

Incubation and Support

Spark Centre - Head Ofﬁce

Oshawa

Incubator (outside region)

Spark Centre - Satellite Ofﬁce

Cobourg

Incubator

Launch Lab

Kingston

Incubator

Launch Lab Satellite Ofﬁce

Belleville

Incubator

Haliburton Creative Business Incubator

Haliburton

Incubator

Northumberland CFDC (IdeaHub)

Cobourg

Incubator

Northumberland CFDC (N100and N1M Program)

Cobourg

Incubator

Eastern Ontario International Incubator

Belleville

Incubator

Excelerator Business Incubator

Smith Falls

Incubator

Eastern Ontario International Incubator

Belleville

Incubator

Peterborough Economic Development

Peterborough

Support

Northumberland Business Advisory Centre

Cobourg

Support

MEDEI Business Advisory Services – Eastern Region

Kingston

Support

Cornwall Business Enterprise Centre

Cornwall

Support

Enterprise Renfrew County

Pembroke

Support

Enterprise Renfrew County

Renfrew

Support

Kingston Economic Centre

Kingston

Support

Appendices

Page 115 of 192

Kawartha Lakes Economic Development Small Business Advisory centre

Lindsay

Support

Leeds Grenville Small Business Enterprise Centre

Brockville

Support

Brockville Economic Development

Brockville

Support

Prescott-Russell Entrepreneurship Centre

Hawkesbury

Support

Small Business Advisory Centre

Smith Falls

Support

Small Business Centre

Belleville

Support

Prince Edward Lanmark Addington CFDC (PELA CFDC)

Picton

Support

Peterborough Innovation Cluster

Peterborough

Support

Peterborough Angel Network

Peterborough

Support

1000 Islands CDC

Brockville

Support

CFDC of North & Central Hastings and South Algonquin

Bancroft

Support

Cornwall & The Counties CFDC

South Glengarry

Support

Frontenac CFDC

Harrowsmith,

Support

Grenville CFDC

Prescott

Support

Haliburton County CDFC

Haliburton

Support

Kawartha Lakes CFDC

Lindsay

Support

Peterborough Business Development Centre Inc.

Peterborough,

Support

Prince Edward/Lennox & Addington CFDC

Picton

Support

Renfrew County CFDC

Renfrew

Support

South Lake CFDC

Keswick

Support

Trenval Business Development Corporation

Belleville

Support

Valley Heartland CFDC

Smith Falls

Support

Southern Ontario Angel Network

Kingston

Support

Prescott and Russell Entrepreneurial Academy

Alfred

Training

Peterborough Economic Development

Peterborough

Support

Greater Peterborough Innovation Cluster

Peterborough

Support

County of Frontenac, Economic Development

Glenburnie

Support

County of Halliburton

Haliburton

Support

County of Hastings, Economic Development

Belleville

Support

Appendices

Page 116 of 192

City of Kawartha Lakes, Economic Development

City of Kawartha Lakes

Support

County of Lanark Economic Development

Perth

Support

United Counties of Leeds and Grenville, Economic Development

Brockville

Support

County of Lennox & Addington, Economic Development

Napanee

Support

County of Northumberland, Economic Development

Cobourg

Support

County of Peterborough, Economic Development

Peterborough

Support

Regional Centre for Business Development and Innovation

Smith falls

Support

Community Futures East

Peterborough

Support

United Counties of Prescott and Russell, Economic Development

L’Orignal

Support

County of Renfrew, Economic Development

Petawawa

Support

Kingston Economic Development KEDCO

Kingston

Support

Peterborough small business startup

Peterborough

Support

Appendices

Page 117 of 192

REFERENCES Aaboen, L., Lindelof, P., & Lofsten, H. (2008). Towards incubator facilitation of technology transfer. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 5(3), 331-335. Acheson, H., Izsak, K., Markianidou, P., & Tsipouri, L. (2011). Innovation policy trends in the EU and beyond. European Union. Retrieved from http://www.proinno-europe.eu/inno-policy-trendchart/page/innovation-policy-trends Agrawal, A. (2008). “Commercializing University Inventions: Are Canadians Less Productive Than Americans?”. Industry Canada Working Paper Series, No. 2008-01. Ahmad, A. J., & Ingle, S. (2011). Relationships matter: Case study of a university campus incubator. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17(6), 626-644. Ahrweiler, P., Pyka, A., & Gilbert, N. (2011). A new model for university-industry links in knowledge-based economies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(2), 218-235. Akçomak, I.S., & Taymaz, E. (2004). Assessing the effectiveness of incubators: The case of Turkey. ERC Working Papers, 1-19. Algieri, B., Aquino, A., & Succurro, M. (2011). Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: the case of Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 382-400. Allen, D. N., & McCluskey, R. (1990). Structure, policy, services, and performance in the business incubator industry. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Winter, 61-78. Allen, K., & Lieberman, M. (2010). University of Southern California. In M. L. Fetters, P. G. Greene, M. P. Rice & J. S. Butler (Eds.), The development of university-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: global practices (pp. 76-98). Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Allman, K., Edler, J., Georghiou, L., Jones, B., Miles, I., Omidvar, O., & Rigby, J. (2011). Measuring wider framework conditions for successful innovation: A system’s review of UK and international innovation data. NESTA. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/reports/assets/features/measuring_wider_framework_conditions_for_successful _innovation Amezcua, A. S. (2010). Boon or boondoggle? Business incubation as entrepreneurship policy. Unpublished manuscript. Martin J. Whitman School of Management. Arechavala-Vargas, R., Díaz-Pérez, C., & Holbrook, J.A. (2009). Globalization of innovation & dynamics of a regional innovation network. Conference on Science & Innovation Policy, Atlanta, GA. Arlotto, J., Sahut, J., & Teulon, F. (2011). What is the performance of incubators? The point of view of coached entrepreneurs. International Journal of Business, 16(4), 341-352. Auditor General of Ontario. (2015). Chapter 3: University Intellectual Property. 2015 Annual Report of the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario. http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en15/3.14en15.pdf Audretsch, D. B. & Lehmann, E. E. (2004). Mansfield’s missing link: The impact of knowledge spillovers on firm growth. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1-2), 207-210. Audretsch, D. B., Phillips, R. J., & Centre for Economic Policy Research (Great Britain). (2007). Entrepreneurship, state economic development policy, and the entrepreneurial university. London, UK: Centre for Economic Policy Research. Autio, E., Kanninen, S., & Gustafsson, R. (2008). First-and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs. Research Policy, 37(1), 59-76. Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Woerter, M. (2008). University-industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises. Research Policy, 37(10), 1865-1883. Barajas, A., Huergo, E., & Moreno, L. (2012). Measuring the economic impact of research joint ventures supported by the EU Framework Programme. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(6), 917-942. Barge-Gil, A., & Modrego, A. (2011). The impact of research and technology organizations on firm competitiveness. Measurement and determinants. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(1), 61-83. Bauer, U. & Kailer, N. 2003). Gruendungsneigung von Technikern am Beispiel der Technischen Universitaet Graz und ausgewaehlten Wirtschaftsingenieurstudiengaengen, Schriftenreihe BWL Education & Research No. 7, Graz. Becker, B., & Gassmann, O. (2006). Corporate incubators: Industrial R&D and what universities can learn from them. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 469-483. Becker, S. A., Niebuhr, R. E., & IGI Global. (2010). Cases on technology innovation entrepreneurial successes and pitfalls. Retrieved from http://qe2a-proxy.mun.ca/login?url=http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve .aspx? Bergek, A. & Norrman, C. (2008). Incubator best practice: A framework. Technovation, 28(1-2), 20-28.

Page 118 of 192

Berman, E. P. (2012). Creating the market university: How academic science became an economic engine. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Beroggi, G. E. G., Levy, M., & Cardinet, E. P. (2006). Designing a model for innovation indicators from a systems perspective. International Journal of Technology Policy and Management, 6(2), 200. Bienkowska, D., Larsen, K., & Sorlin, S. (2010). Public-private innovation: Mediating roles and ICT niches of industrial research institutes. Innovation: Management, Policy, & Practice, 12, 206-216. Bjerregaard, T. (2010). Industry and academia in convergence: Micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration. Technovation, 30(2), 100-108. BMBF. (2002). Bundesministerium für Bildun g und Wissenschaft (Hrsg.): Berufsbildungsbericht 2002. Bonn: BMBF 2002 Bottazzi, L., Da Rin, M., & Hellman, T. (2008). Who are the active investors? Journal of Financial Economics, 89(3), 488-512. Boissin J-P. (2003), Le concept de « Maison de l’Entrepreneuriat». Un outil d’action pour l’initiative économique sur les campus, Etude dirigée par Jean-Pierre Boissin pour la Direction de la Technologie du Ministère français de la Jeunesse, de l’Education Nationale et de la Recherche. http://www.grenoble-universite-recherche.org/mde Bradshaw, T. K., Munroe, T., & Westwind, M. (2005). Economic development via university-based technology transfer: Strategies for non-elite universities. International Journal of Technology Transfer & Commercialization, 4(3), 279-301. Bramwell, A., Nelles, J., & Wolfe, D. A. (2008). Knowledge, innovation and institutions: Global and local dimensions of the ICT cluster in Waterloo, Canada. Regional Studies, 42(1), 101-116. Branstetter, L. G., & Sakakibara, M. (2002). When do research consortia work well and why? Evidence from Japanese panel data. The American Economic Review, 92(1), 143-159. Busom, I., & Fernández-Ribas, A. (2008). The impact of firm participation in R&D programmes on R&D partnerships. Research Policy, 37(2), 240-257. Canadian Association of Business Incubation. (2012). A partial listing of business and technology incubators in Canada. Canadian Association of Business Incubation. Retrieved from http://www.cabi.ca/docs/Incubators-in-Canada.pdf Caldera, A., & Debande, O. (2010). Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer: An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 39(9), 1160-1173. Cardozo, R., Ardichvili, A., & Strauss, A. (2011). Effectiveness of university technology transfer: an organizational population ecology view of a maturing supplier industry. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(2), 173-202. Carayannis, E. G., Evans, D., & Hanson, M. (2003). A cross-cultural learning strategy for entrepreneurship education: outline of key concepts and lessons learned from a comparative study of entrepreneurship students in France and the US. Technovation, 23(9), 757-771. Celeski, S. (2011). Critical success factors for research collaborations between firms and research institutes in New Zealand: A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of commerce and administration in marketing. Retrieved from http://researcharchive. vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/1726 Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (CSES). (2002). Benchmarking business incubators. European Commission Enterprise Directorate- General. Retrieved from http://www.cses.co.uk/upl/File/Benchmarking-Business-Incubators-main-report-Part-1.pdf Center for Rural Studies (CRS), University of Vermont (2003). NECFE–Northeast Center for Food Entrepreneurship, Client Outcome Report, October 2003. Retrieved from www.crs.uvm.edu/evaluation - 10 03 2005) Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of UK university technology transfer offices: parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34(3), 369-384. Charney, A., & Libecap, G. D. (2000). Impact of entrepreneurship education (p. 4560). Kansas City, MO: Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership. Chavez, J. R. (2010). University-industry technology transfer in Canada: An analysis of stakeholders’ performance using system dynamics. Retrieved from http://www.archipel.uqam.ca/3627/1/D1927.pdf Chen, C. J. (2009). Technology commercialization, incubator and venture capital, and new venture performance. Journal of Business Research, 62, 93-103. Chen, P. P. (2011). Universities’ entrepreneurial performance: The role of agglomeration economies. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (921925511)

Page 119 of 192

Chen, G. (2006). Regional development scheme in China using the functions of university and its adaptability to other developing countries. Retrieved from http://www.kochi-tech.ac.jp/library/ron/2005/g11/D/ 1076007.pdf Chen, K., & Kenney, M. (2005). The role of University/research institute-industry linkages in the technological development of Beijing and Shanghai. Presented at Universities as Drivers of the Urban Economies in Asia, May 24-25, 2005. Retrieved from http://brie.berkeley.edu/publications/WP168.pdf Chen, K., & Kenney, M. (2007). Universities/research institutes and regional innovation systems: The cases of Beijing and Shenzhen. World Development, 35(6), 1056-1074. Cho, M. (2008). Corporate helix model: The industry and triple helix networks. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 4(2), 103-120. Choi, J. Y., Lee, J. H., & Sohn, S. Y. (2009). Impact analysis for national R&D funding in science and technology using quantification method II. Research Policy, 38(10), 1534-1544. Choo, S. (2008). Commercializing technological innovations: A conceptual framework for designing entrepreneurial mentoring programs. International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, 1(2), 146-164. Chorafas, D. N. (2011). Education and employment in the European Union: The social cost of business. Burlington, VT: Gower. Chu, P. Y., Teng, M. J., Lee, C. T., & Chiu, H. (2010). Spin-off strategies and performance: A case study of Taiwan’s Acer group. Asian Business & Management, 9(1), 101-125. Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. (2011). The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1084-1093. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Mustar, P., & Knockaert, M. (2007). Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 609-640. Clements, M. M. (2008). Patenting at universities in the United States: A network analysis of the complexities of domestic and international university patenting activities. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (304607463) Coccia, M. (2008). Spatial mobility of knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity: Analysis and measurement of the impact within the geoeconomic space. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 105-122. Coenen, L., & Moodysson, J. (2009). Putting constructed regional advantage into Swedish practice. European Planning Studies, 17(4), 587-604. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science, 48(1), 1-23. Colapinto, C. (2011). The role of Italian incubators and science parks in the triple-helix era. The hybrid model developed in Lombardy. International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, 2(3), 290-303. Coleman, D., & Kamboureli, S. (2011). Retooling the humanities: The culture of research in Canadian universities (1st ed.). Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press. Collier, A., & Gray, B. (2010). The commercialization of university innovations – A qualitative analysis of the New Zealand situation. Otago, NZ: University of Otago. Collier, A., Gray, B. J., & Ahn, M. J. (2011). Enablers and barriers to university and high technology SME partnerships. Small Enterprise Research, 18(1), 2-18. Collier, A., & Zhao, F. (2010). Case studies of North American university performance in technology transfer and commercialization. In A. Becker & R. Niebuhr (Eds.), Cases on Technology Innovation: Entrepreneurial Successes and Pitfalls (pp.1-51). Portland, OR: Business Science Reference. Collier, A. J. (2008). Identifying superior performance factors relevant to Australian university TTOs. Comparative Technology Transfer and Society, 6(2), 61-87,154. Colombo, M. G., D’adda, D., & Piva, E. (2010). The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: An empirical analysis. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 113-140. Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators?: Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31(7), 1103-1122. Colombo, M. G., & Piva, E. (2008). Strengths and weaknesses of academic startups: A conceptual model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(1), 37-49. Conceicao, P., & Heitor, M. V. (2002). University-based entrepreneurship and economic development: A learning-centred model. International Journal of Technology Policy and Management, 2(3), 220-239.

Page 120 of 192

Conference board of Canada. (2016). International Rankings: Innovation. Retrieved from http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/innovation.aspx Connor, H., Hirsh, W., & Council for Industry and Higher Education (Great Britain). (2008). Influence through collaboration: Employer demand for higher learning and engagement with higher education: Summary report. London, UK: Council for Industry and Higher Education. Conseil de la science et de la technologie (Québec). (2011). AVIS la gestion de la propriété intellectuelle dans les relations entre l’université et l’entreprise : Pour une véritable dynamique d’alliances stratégiques. Cooke, P. (2004). The role of research in regional innovation systems: New models meeting knowledge economy demands. International Journal of Technology Management, 28(3-6), 507-533. Cooke, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). Regional development in the knowledge-based economy: The construction of advantage. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 5-15. Corbyn, Z. (2008). RCUK abandons impact formula. The Times Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/ story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=400973 Cortés-Aldana, F. A., García-Melón, M., Fernández-de-Lucio, I., Aragonés-Beltrán, P., & Poveda-Bautista, R. (2009). University objectives and socioeconomic results: A multicriteria measuring of alignment. European Journal of Operational Research, 199(3), 811-822. Corti, E., & Torello, R. I. (2004). Promoting ICT entrepreneurship in the Campania region of Italy: A network of academic incubators. Industry and Higher Education, 18(1), 33-37. Cosh, A., & Hughes, A. (2010). Never mind the quality feel the width: University-industry links and government financial support for innovation in small high-technology businesses in the UK and the USA. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 66-91. Couchman, P. K., & Fulop, L. (2009). Examining partner experience in cross-sector collaborative projects focused on the commercialization of R&D. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 11(1), 85-103. Couchman, P. K., McLoughlin, I., & Charles, D. R. (2008). Lost in translation? Building science and innovation city strategies in Australia and the UK. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 10(2/3), 211-223. Council of Graduate Schools in the United States. (2007). Capitalizing on innovation: Entrepreneurship and graduate education. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools. Creech, H., & Ramji, A. (2004). Knowledge networks: Guidelines for assessment. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). Retrieved from http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2004/networks_guidelines_for_ assessment.pdf Créplet, F. (2007). Approche cognitive des collaborations universités-entreprises. Revue Française De Gestion, (4), 47-68. Crespi, G., D’Este, P., Fontana, R., & Geuna, A. (2011). The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer. Research Policy, 40(1), 55-68. Crespo, M. (2003). Une nouvelle révolution universitaire? L’échange des rôles de la triade «université-entreprise-état». Revue Des Sciences De l’Éducation, 29(2). CRS – Center for Rural Studies, University of Vermont. (2003). NECFE – Northeast Center for Food Entrepreneurship, Client Outcome Report, October 2003. Retrieved from www.crs.uvm.edu/evaluation CSES. (2002). Benchmarking of business incubators. Sevenoaks, UK: Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services. Cumming, D. J., & Fischer, E. (2012). Publicly funded business advisory services and entrepreneurial outcomes. Research Policy, 41(2), 467-481. Cumming, D. J., & Fischer, E. (2012). Publicly funded business advisory services and entrepreneurial outcomes. Research Policy, 41(2), 467-481. Czarnitzki, D., Hanel, P., & Rosa, J. M. (2011). Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms. Research Policy, 40(2), 217-229. Dahlman, C. (2009). Different innovation strategies, different results: Brazil, Russia, India, China and Korea (the BRICKs). In V. Chandra, D. Ercal, P. C. Padoan & C. A. Primo Braga (Eds.), OECD General Economics & Future Studies, 9 (pp. 122-159). Washington, DC: OECD and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Dalhousie University, & Gardner Pinfold Consulting Economists Limited. (2011). Economic impact analysis, Dalhousie University. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/id/10471227

Page 121 of 192

Dalziel, M., Noor Tahmina, T., Rowsell, J., & Zhao, X. (2012). A Review of Academic Investigations of the Impact of Government Investments in Research and Innovation. University of Ottawa. Davey, T., Kliewe, T., Sijde, P., & McIntyre, M. (2008). Continuous high technology business incubation: Cross-sectoral comparison of approaches to high technology business incubation. Retrieved from http://doc.utwente.nl/ 73753/1/Davey.pdf Dawn, L. B., & Lane, M. D. (2012). Individual entrepreneurial orientation: Development of a measurement instrument. Education & Training, 54(2/3), 219-233. De Cleyn, S. H., & Braet, J. (2008). IPR in joint research projects: Evidence from practice. The Journal of Private Equity, 12(1), 76-84, 4-5. Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321-342. Debroux, P. (2008). Innovation in Japan: What role for university spin-offs? Asia Pacific Business Review, 14(3), 443-460. Dee, N. J., Livesey, F., Gill, D., & Minshall, T. (2011). Incubation for growth: A review of the impact of business incubation on new ventures with high growth potential. NESTA. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/ publications/reports/assets/features/Incubation%20for%20Growth Demarteau, M. (2002). A theoretical framework and grid for analysis of programme – Evaluation practices. Evaluation, 8(4), 454-473. Deschamps, I., Hélie, M., Macedo, M., École de technologie supérieure tous droits réservés, & Conseil de la science et de la technologie (Québec). (2011). Modèles des réussite des collaborations université entreprise au québec dans un contexte d’innovation ouverte rapport. Di Gropello, E. (2012). Putting higher education to work: Skills and research for growth in East Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank. Dillard, S., Golovan, I., Drolet, G. & Conseil de la science et de la technologie (Québec). (2011). La gestion de la propriété intellectuelle dans les relations entre l’université et l’entreprise revue des expériences au Québec au Canada et à l’international : Document d’accompagnement. Djeflat, A. (2008). Universities and scientific research in the Maghreb states: Power politics and innovation systems. International Journal of Technology Management, 45(1-2), 102-113. Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 225-247. DoBell, D. C. (2009). An interpretive study of client graduation thresholds in the university-sponsored technology incubator. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (304897996) Doern, G. B., & Stoney, C. (Eds.). (2009). Research and innovation policy changing federal government-university relations. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press. Dzisah, J., Zarifa, D., & Kelly, B. (2012). Leveraging of Public Investments in HERD: A Synthesis of the Triple Helix Literature. A Knowledge Synthesis Report Submitted to SSHRC—Industry Canada. Nipissing University, North Bay, Ontario. Dzisah, J., Ranga, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2012). Whither the university? The Novum Trivium and the transition from industrial to knowledge society. Social Science Information, 51(2), 143-164. Eom, B. Y., & Lee, K. (2010). Determinants of industry–academy linkages and, their impact on firm performance: The case of Korea as a latecomer in knowledge industrialization. Research Policy, 39(5), 625-639. Espina, R.U. (2008). An assessment of a university technology business incubator (UTBI) using a multilevel framework. Canberra City, Australia: Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, Australian National University. Retrieved from http://www.pahrdf.org.ph/pahrdf_/ltoutputs/University%20Technology%20Business%20Incubatorltoutputs-3133621356103232009.pdf Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators: Innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks. Science and Public Policy, 29(2), 115-128. Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: University-industry-government innovation in action. New York, NY: Routledge. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.

Page 122 of 192

European Union. (2012). Innovation union scoreboard 2011. European Union. Retrieved from http://www.eclac.cl/iyd/noticias/pais/8/31508/RCheca_doc_2.pdf Fan, K. C., Hsiao, H., Luong, L., Lin, G., & Wu, N. (2004). Development of a new self-sufficient model for university incubator. International Journal of Innovation and Incubation, 1(1), 33. Fayolle, A., & Kyrö, P. (2008). The dynamics between entrepreneurship, environment and education. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Feller, I., Ailes, C. P., & Roessner, J. D. (2002). Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centers. Research Policy, 31(3), 457-474. Ference Weicker & Company Ltd. (2014) Evaluation of the Community Futures Program, Kitchener-Waterloo, Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario. http://www.feddevontario.gc.ca/eic/site/723.nsf/eng/02074.html Franke, N., & Lüthje, C. (2004). Entrepreneurial intentions of business students—A benchmarking study. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 1(03), 269-288. Frenz, M., & Ietto-Gillies, G. (2009). The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey. Research Policy, 38(7), 1125-1135. Fueglistaller, U.; Müller, Chr.; Halter, F. (2004). Customer Value für kleinere und mittlere Unternehmen. In: Belz, Bieger Hrsg (2004), S. 447-485. Customer Value. Kundenvorteile schaffen Unternehmensvorteile. Frankfurt: Ueberreuter 2004. S. 447-485 Gans, J. S., Hsu, D. H., & Stern, S. (2008). The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: Evidence from patent grant delays. Management Science, 54(5), 982-997. Gassol, J. H. (2007). The effect of university culture and stakeholders’ perceptions on university-business linking activities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(5), 489. Gausdal, A. H. (2006). Towards a regional innovation system? The role of a regional university (Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/conf/olkc/archive/olkc1/papers/201_gausdal.pdf Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) Consortium. (2013). GEM Conceptual Framework Version 2. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/wiki/1147 Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35(6), 790-807. Gibb, A., Haskins, G., Education, D. E., & Robertson, I. (2009). Leading the entrepreneurial university. NCGE Policy Paper, October, NCGE, Birmingham. Retrieved from http://www.ncee.org.uk/publication/leading the_entrepreneurial_university.pdf Golla, S., Halter, F., Fueglistaller, U. & Klandt, H. (2004). Gruendungsneigung Studierender – Eine empirische Analyse in Deutschland und der Schweiz, Proceedings of G-Forum 2004, Stuttgart. Government of Canada. (2011). Imagination to innovation: Building Canadian paths to prosperity. State of the Nation 2010: Canada’s Science, Technology and Innovation. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.stic-csti.ca/eic/site/stic-csti.nsf/vwapj/10 059_IC_SotN_Rapport_EN_WEB INTERACTIVE.pdf/$FILE/10-059_IC_SotN_Rapport_EN_WEB_INTERACTIVE.pdf Griffith, R., Harrison, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2006). How special is the special relationship? Using the impact of US R&D spillovers on UK firms as a test of technology sourcing. The American Economic Review, 96(5), 1859-1875. Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2008). Inside the black box of business incubation: Study B—scale assessment, model refinement, and incubation outcomes. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(5), 439-471. Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2004). A systematic review of business incubation research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 55-82. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A., & Tratjenberg, M. (2005). Market value & patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16-38. Hamdani, D. (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring business incubation, SIEID working paper series, Statistics Canada Cat. no. 88F0006XIE – no. 2006 – 006, Ottawa, Canada. Henry, C., Hill, F., & Leitch, C. (2003). Entrepreneurship education and training. Ashgate: Aldershot. Higon, D. A. (2007). The impact of R&D spillovers on UK manufacturing TFP: A dynamic panel approach. Research Policy, 36(7), 964-979.

Page 123 of 192

Holzer, F., & Adametz, C. (2003). TUG-AbsolventInnenbefragung 2003. Final Report, Technical University of Graz. Huffman, D., & Quigley, J. M. (2002). The role of the university in attracting high tech entrepreneurship: A silicon valley tale. The Annals of Regional Science, 36(3), 403-419. Huggins, R., Jones, M., & Upton, S. (2008). Universities as drivers of knowledge-based regional development: A triple helix analysis of Wales. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(1), 24-47. Hulsbeck, M., Lehmann, E. E., & Starnecker, A. (2011). Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, (Article in Press), 1-17. Hussler, C., & Rondé, P. (2007). The impact of cognitive communities on the diffusion of academic knowledge: Evidence from the networks of inventors of a French university. Research Policy, 36(2), 288-302. Hussler, C., Picard, F., & Tang, M. F. (2010). Taking the ivory from the tower to coat the economic world: Regional strategies to make science useful. Technovation, 30(9-10), 508-518. Hynes, B. (1996). Entrepreneurship education and training – introducing entrepreneurship into non-business disciplines. Journal of European Industrial Training, 20(8), 10-17. Hynes, B., Costin, Y., & Birdthistle, N. (2011). Practice-based learning in entrepreneurship education. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 1(1), 16-28. Iacobucci, D., Iacopini, A., Micozzi, A., & Orsini, S. (2011). Academic entrepreneurship and regional growth. Evidence from Italian spin-offs. Polytechnic University of March, 1-23. Izushi, H. (2003). Impact of the length of relationships upon the use of research institutes by SMEs. Research Policy, 32(5), 771-788. Jenkins, T., Dahlby, D., Gupta, A., Leroux, M., Naylor, D., & Robinson, N. (2011). Innovation Canada: A call to action. Ottawa, ON: Public Works and Government Services Canada. Retrieved from http://rd-review.ca/eic/site/033.nsf/vwapj/R-D_InnovationCanada_Final-eng.pdf/$FILE/R-D_InnovationCanada_Final-e ng.pdf Jones, O., Macpherson, A., & Woollard, D. (2008). Entrepreneurial ventures in higher education. Analyzing organizational growth. International Small Business Journal, 26(6), 683-708. Kaplan, S.N., Sensoy, B.A., & Strömberg, P. (2009). Should investors bet on the jockey or the horse? Evidence from the evolution of firms from early business plans to public companies. The Journal of Finance, 64(1), 75-115. Kailer, N. (2010). Entrepreneurship education at universities in German-speaking countries: empirical findings and proposals for the design of university-wide concepts. Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education, International Perspectives, 3, 248-273. Kaul, V. K. (2002). Innovation, capabilities and performance of Canadian SMEs in high tech industries. In C. Harvie & B. C. Lee (Eds.), Sustaining SME Innovation, Competitiveness and Development in the Global Economy (pp.474-500). Wollongong, AU: University of Wollongong. Kenney, M., & Patton, D. (2011). Does inventor ownership encourage university research-derived entrepreneurship? A six university comparison. Research Policy, 40(8), 1100-1112. Kenney, M., Nelson, A., & Patton, D. (2009). Le pôle universitaire de haute technologie de madison, états-unis. Développement Économique Et Création d’Emplois Locaux (LEED) Pôles De Compétitivité, Innovation Et Entrepreneuriat, 189. Kent, N. (2008). Educating for our future. Community College Journal, 79(3), 4. Keogh, W., McVey, B., & Bruce, R. (2006). Creating knowledge in an entrepreneurial environment for SMEs: Learning from an American experience. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 1(1-2), 219-237. Key, P. (2001). Penn’s P2B ventures: New friend for startups. Philadelphia Business Journal, 20(23), 1. Kharabsheh, R., Magableh, I. K., & Arabiyat, T. S. (2011). Obstacles of success of technology parks: The case of Jordan. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(6), 219-226. Kim, Y. (2011). The ivory tower approach to entrepreneurial linkage: Productivity changes in university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, (Article in Press), 1-18. Kim, Y., Kim, W., & Yang, T. (2012). The effect of the Triple Helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the U.S. Research Policy 41,154-166.

Page 124 of 192

Klapper, R. (2004). Government goals and entrepreneurship education-an investigation at a Grande Ecole in France. Education+ Training, 46(3), 127-137. Klein, J. L., Manzagol, C., Tremblay, D. G., & Rousseau, S. (2004). University–Industry interrelations in Montreal in the reconversion to the knowledge economy. Retrieved from https://teluq.ca/chaireecosavoir/pdf/NRC04-08A.pdf Koschatzky, K. (2001). The role of higher education institutions for entrepreneurship stimulation in regional innovation systems Evidence from the network-oriented “exist: Promotion of university-based start-ups” program in Germany. Karlsruhe, DE: ISI, Inst. Systems and Innovation Research, Dept. Innovation Services and Regional Development. Kruss, G., & Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). (2006). Working partnerships in higher education, industry and innovation: Creating knowledge networks. Cape Town, ZA: HSRC. Landry, R., Amara, N., & Ouimet, M. (2007). Determinants of knowledge transfer: Evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(6), 561-592. Lawton-Smith, H., Romeo, S., & Bagchi-Senb, S. (2008). Oxfordshire biomedical university spin-offs: An evolving system. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1(2), 303–319. Lendel, I. (2010). The impact of research universities on regional economies: The concept of university products. Economic Development Quarterly, 24(3), 210-230. Lendner, C., & Dowling, M. (2007). The organizational structure of university business incubators and their impact on the success of start-ups: An international study. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 7(6), 541-555. Lin, G. T. R., Shen, Y., Yu, H., & Sun, C. (2008). Benchmarking evaluation of national innovation policy implementation. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 4(2), 1-23. Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2004). Proximity as a resource base for competitive advantage: University–industry links for technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3), 311-326. Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2002). Growth, Management and Financing of New Technology-Based Firms—Assessing Value-Added Contributions of Firms Located on and off Science Parks. The International Journal of Management Science 30(3), 143–154. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2007). The economics of university research parks. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 661-674. Lopez-Claros, A., & Mata, Y. N. (2011). Policies and institutions underpinning country innovation: Results from the innovation capacity index. In A. López-Claros (Ed.) The innovation for development report 2010–2011 (pp. 3-63). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Lucas, W. A., & Cooper, S. Y. (2004). Enhancing self-efficacy to enable entrepreneurship: the case of CMI’s connections. MIT Sloan Working Paper No. 4489-04. Lucas, M., Sands, A., & Wolfe, D. (2009). Regional clusters in a global industry: ICT clusters in Canada. European Planning Studies, 17(2), 189-209. Maia, C., & Claro, J. (2012). The role of a proof of concept center in a university ecosystem: An exploratory study. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-10. Mian, S. A. (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(4), 251-285. M’Chirgui, Z. (2012). Assessing the performance of business incubators: Recent France evidence. Business and Management Research, 1(1), 62-76. Retrieved from http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.php/bmr/article/view/806 Matlay, H. (2011). Developing enterprising graduates: Stakeholder involvement, investment and expectations of entrepreneurship education. International Council for Small Business (ICSB) World Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-22). Matt, M., & Tang, M. F. (2010). Management of university incubators in China and in France: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 11(3), 282-300. Maxwell, A., & Levesque, M. (2011). Technology incubators: Facilitating technology transfer or creating regional wealth? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 13(2), 122-143. Mencin, O., & Erikson, C. (2009). Case study: Silicon Valley’s US market access center: The incubator as a soft landing zone. International Journal of Entrepreneurship & Innovation Management, 10(3), 233-241.

Menzies, T. V., Brock University, & Faculty of Business. (2009). Entrepreneurship and the Canadian universities: Report of a national study of entrepreneurship education. St. Catharines, ON: Faculty of Business, Brock University.

Page 125 of 192

Mets, T., & Andrijevskaja, J. (2006). Towards entrepreneurial regions: Universities & innovation networks challenged by the knowledge society: Second BEPART conference, Tartu, 26-27 October 2006: Proceedings abstracts. Tartu, EE: University of Tartu. Meyer, S. P. (2006). A spatial analysis of small- and medium-sized information technology firms in Canada and the importance of local connections to institutions of higher education. Canadian Geographer, 50(1), 114-134. Millier-Dicknson-Blais. (2014). Eastern Ontario’s Economic Development Strategy. Retrieved from http://www.eowc.org/en/futuredirections/resources/EconomicDevelopmentStrategy2014.pdf Minitti, M. (2005c). Global Entreprensurship Monitor: 2005 Executive Report. Retrieved from: http://entreprenorskapsforum.se/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/GEM-Global-Report_2005.pdf Mittelstädt, A., & Cerri, F. (2008). Fostering entrepreneurship for innovation. OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/11/41/41978441.pdf Mitteraurer, L. (2003). Evaluation des Unternehmensgruendungs programms. UNIUN – Gruendungsverlauf, Erfolgsbilanz, Fiskalanalyse der Programme UNIUN 1999 & UNIUN 2001, Final Report for the Alumni-Society of the University of Vienna. Morris, R. (2011). 2011 High-impact entrepreneurship global report. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/docs/search?doc_cat_id=2&sub_cat_id=16&team_id=0&q= Morris, R. (2011). GEM endeavor 2011 high impact entrepreneurship report. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/docs/295/gem-endeavor-2011-high-impact-entrepreneurship-report Morrison, E. & Wunderlich D. (2016). Moving our innovation thinking from barriers to ecosystems. Retrieved from http://www.edmorrison.com/moving-our-innovation-thinking-from-barriers-to-ecosystems/ Morrison, E. (2014). Adapting the Fraunhofer model to the US market: Innovation ecosystems. Retrieved from http://www.edmorrison.com/adapting-the-fraunhofer-model-to-the-us-market/ Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives, teaching methods, and impact indicators. Education & Training, 52(1), 20-47. Nabeshima, K., & Yusuf, S. (2007). How universities can promote economic growth. Washington, DC: World Bank. Nandram, S. & Samson, K. (2004). Ahead of the pack, in Nyenrode NOW, Vol. 2, March, Breukele, pp. 10 – 11. Nakkula, M. (2004). Initiating, Leading, and Feeling in Control of One’s Fate – Executive Summary of Findings from the 2002-2003 Study of NFTE in Six Boston Public High Schools, Project IF: Inventing the Future, Harvard University Graduate School of Education, Cambridge/Mass. Retrieved from www.nfte.com/downloads/research_harvardexecsummary-01-02.pdf. NESTA. (2009). The innovation index measuring the UK’s investment in innovation and its effects. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/ publications/reports/assets/features/the_innovation_index Neurath, W., & Katzmair, H. (2004). Networks of innovation – Evaluation and monitoring of technology programs based on Social Network Analysis (SNA). Platform Forschungs-und Technologieevaluierung GesbR. Retrieved from www.fteval.at Nikzad, R., Sedigh, G., Ghazal, R., & Kijek, F. (2007). The effect of government performed R&D on productivity in Canada: A macro level study. The Business Review, Cambridge, 9(1), 133-139. Nilsson, J. E. (2006). The role of universities in regional innovation systems: A Nordic perspective. Copenhagen, DK: Copenhagen Business School Press. Niosi J. & Bas T.G. (2001). The competencies of regions. Small Business Economics, 17(1-2), 31-42. Niyonkuru, R. (2005). Entrepreneurship education at tertiary institutions in Rwanda: A situation analysis. Retrieved from http://etd.uwc.ac.za/usrfiles/ modules/etd/ docs/etd_init_6209_1176900663.pdf North, D., Smallbone, D., & Vickers, I. (2001). Public sector support for innovating SMEs. Small Business Economics, 16(4), 303-317. OECD. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/Entrepreneurial-ecosystems.pdf OECD. (2012). OECD Economic Surveys: Canada 2012. Retrieved from https://www.oise.utoronto.ca/hec/UserFiles/File/OECD_Symposium/Canada.pdf OECD. (2010). Regional innovation strategies. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/6/48137737.pdf

100

Page 126 of 192

O’shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 99-114. Palmintera, D., Hodgson, R., Tornatzky, L., Connecticut, Governor’s Council on Economic Competitiveness and Technology, Connecticut Technology Transfer and Commercialization Advisroy Board, & Innovation Associates. (2005). Accelerating economic development through university technology transfer based on report to the Connecticut technology transfer and commercialization advisory board of the governor’s competitiveness council. Washington, DC: Innovation Associates. Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 28(2), 129-144. Philbin, S. (2008). Process model for university-industry research collaboration. European Journal of Innovation Management, 11(4), 488-521. Philpott, K., Dooley, L., O’Reilly, C., & Lupton, G. (2011). The entrepreneurial university: Examining the underlying academic tensions. Technovation, 31(4), 161-170. Pihkala, J., & Miettinen, A. (2002, July). Entrepreneurship education: does it promote entrepreneurial potential? A field study in Finnish polytechnics. In Proceedings of the Internationalizing Entrepreneurship Education and Training Conference (pp. 8-10). RE$EARCH Infosource. (2014). © RE$EARCH Infosource Inc. Canada’s Top 50 Research Universities List 2014 Analysis. Retrieved from http://www.researchinfosource.com/pdf/2014_Top%2050_%20Article.pdf Roberts, E. B., & Eesley, C. E. (2011). Entrepreneurial impact: The role of MIT - An updated report. Boston, MA: Now Publishers Inc. Roelofsen, A., Boon, W. P. C., Kloet, R. R., & Broerse, J. E. W. (2011). Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what. Research Policy, 40(3), 341-354. Roessner, D., Manrique, L., & Park, J. (2010). The economic impact of engineering research centers: preliminary results of a pilot study. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(5), 475-493. Rossi, S. (2006). Patents, capital structure & the demand for corporate securities. American Finance Annual Meeting, Boston, MA. Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). University–incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34(3), 305-320. Saetre et al., 2009 Access to support and resources for innovation for businesses and entrepreneurs in rural areas Fournier, 2006. Salvador, E. (2011). How effective are research spin-off firms in Italy? Revue d’Économie Industrielle, 133, 99-122. Saperstein, J., & Rouach, D. (2002). Creating regional wealth in the innovation economy: Models, perspectives, and best practices. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Santoro, M. D., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2001). Relationship dynamics between university research centers and industrial firms: Their impact on technology transfer activities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 163-171. Schmitt, C., & Bayad, M. (2003). L’entrepreneuriat dans les universités françaises: Regard sur le dispositif d’incubation. Actes Du Colloque L’entrepreneur En Action, Contextes Et Pratiques, AIREPME. Science, Technology and Innovation Council. (2010). State of the Nation 2010: Canada’s Science, Technology and Innovation System. Retrieved from http://www.stic-csti.ca/eic/site/stic-csti.nsf/eng/h_00038.html Scott, T. (2002). A network of incubators: Utilizing regional strengths and resources. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 3(4), 279-284. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48. Smallbone, D., Landström, H., & Jones-Evans, D. (2009). Entrepreneurship and growth in local, regional and national economies: Frontiers in European entrepreneurship research. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Soetanto, D. P., & Jack, S. L. (2011a). Business incubators and the networks of technology-based firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-22.

101

Page 127 of 192

Soetanto, D. P., & Jack, S. L. (2011b). Networks and networking activities of innovative firms in incubators an exploratory study. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 12(2), 127-136. Sonka, S. T., & Chicoine, D. L. (2004). Value and university innovation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(5), 1337-1344. Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business venturing, 22(4), 566-591. Statistics Canada (2011). Canada Household Survey Profile, 2011. Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E Sternberg, R. & Mueller C. (2004). Wissenschaftliche Begleitforschung zum Projekt “Junge Innovatoren” des Ministeriums fuer Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst des Landes Baden-Wuerttemberg, University of Cologne, Cologne Szopa, A., Karwowski, W., & Ordóñez de Pablos, P. (2013). Academic entrepreneurship and technological innovation: A business management perspective. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Tamasy, C. (2007). Rethinking technology-oriented business incubators: Developing a robust policy instrument for entrepreneurship, innovation, and regional development? Growth and Change, 38(3), 460-473. Tang, M. F., Llerena, P., & Université Louis Pasteur (Strasbourg). (2008). Le transfert de technologies de l’université vers l’industrie dans le système national d’innovation chinois technology transfer from university to industry in the chinese national innovation system. Retrieved from http://scd-theses.u strasbg.fr/1487/01/TANG _Ming_Feng_2008.pdf Thorp, H. H., & Goldstein, B. (2010). Engines of innovation: The entrepreneurial university in the twenty-first century. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Thune, T., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2011). Institutionalization of university-industry interaction: An empirical study of the impact of formal structures on collaboration patterns. Science and Public Policy, 38(2), 99-107. Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., Thursby, M. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U.S. universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2) 59-72. Tohmo, T. & Kaipainen, J. (2000). Tyottomyydestae yrittaejyyteen. Evaluoinnin loppuraportti Polut yrittaejyyteen – tiomenpisteestae ohjelmakaudella 1995 – 1999, Research centre of the Department of Economics and Chydenius Institute, University of Jyvaeskylae. Toole, A. A. (2012). The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 41(1), 1-12. Trott, P., Scholten, V. E., & Hartmann, D. (2008). How university incubators may be overprotective and hindering the success of the young firm: Findings from a preliminary study. Engineering Management Conference, 2008. IEMC Europe 2008. IEEE International, 1-5. UKBI. (2009). UK Incubators – Identifying Best Practice. Birmingham, UK: UK Business Incubation Limited. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, (2010). A Practitioner’s Guide to Economic Development Tools for Regional Competitiveness in a Knowledge-Based Economy. Retrieved from https://www.statsamerica.org/innovation/guide/practitioners_guide.pdf Uyarra, E., & Manchester Business School. (2008). The impact of universities on regional innovation a critique and policy implications. Retrieved from http://www.mbs.ac.uk/research/workingpapers/image.aspx?a=171 Valida, A. C. (2009). Becoming world-class universities Singapore style: Are organized research units the answer? (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (304827913) Van der Berghe, L., & Guild, P. D. (2008). The strategic value of new university technology and its impact on exclusivity of licensing transactions: An empirical study. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 91-103. Van der Sijde, P., & Baltic Entrepreneurship Partners. (2008). Teaching entrepreneurship cases for education and training. Heidelberg, DE: Physica-Verlag. Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., Van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553-564. Veciana, J.M. (2005). ‘La creació d’empreses. Un enfocament gerencial’, Collecció d’estudis econòmics, no. 3, Servei d’estudis “La Caixa”, Barcelona (1ª Edició).

102

Page 128 of 192

Vega, A., Chiasson, M., & Brown, D. H. Setting up university support to small and medium enterprise innovation: Managerial, policy and research implications. Retrieved from http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/47361 Ventriss, C., & Gurdon, M. A. (2006). Emerging issues in economic development policy and technology incubators: The Vermont center for emerging technologies experience. Comparative Technology Transfer and Society, 4(1), 22-52. Verhoef, G. (2009). Systems and support mechanisms for developing, protecting, managing and exploiting intellectual property in South Africa. Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association. Versakelis, N. C. (2001). The impact of patent protection, economy openness and national culture on R&D investment: A cross-country empirical investigation. Research Policy, 30(7), 1059-1068. Vesper, K., & Gartner, W. (1997). Measuring the progress in entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 403-21. Viale, R., & Etzkowitz, H. (2010). The capitalization of knowledge a triple helix of university-industry-government. Retrieved from http://esc-web.lib.cbs.dk/ login?url=http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected /external/AbstractView/S9781849807180 Vickers, K., Salamo, G., Loewer, O., & Ahlen, J. (2001). Creation of an entrepreneurial university culture, the University of Arkansas as a case study. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(4), 617.

103

Vigdor, M., Martin, M., Unesco, International Institute for Educational Planning, & University of the West Indies. (2003). Management of interfaces for university-industry partnerships: Module 2. Paris, FR: Unesco. Vigdor, M., Unesco, University of the West Indies, & Universitah ha-`Ivrit bi-Yerushalayim. (2003). Yissum, the interface for university-industry partnerships at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel (Rev ed.). Paris, FR: Unesco. Vincett, P. S. (2010). The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy. Research Policy, 39(6), 736-747. Voisey, P., Gornall, L., Jones, P., & Thomas, B. (2004). A comparison of UK business incubation practice and the identification of key success factors, WEI Working Paper Series Paper 41. Retrieved from http://cosmic.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/webcat/hwwa/edok05/f10828g/WP41.pdf Voisey, P., Gornall, L., Jones, P., & Thomas, B. (2005). Developing a model for a ’ladder of incubation’ linked to higher and further education institutions in Wales. Industry and Higher Education, 19(6), 445-456. Voisey, P., Gornall, L., Jones, P., & Brychan, T. (2006). The measurement of success in a business incubation project. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(3), 454-468. Westhead, P. & Storey, D. J. (1994). An assessment of firms located on and of science parks in the United Kingdom. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1510008 Woerter, M. (2012). Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(6), 828-866. Wolfe, M. (2011). Examining commercialization in Ontario and the barriers to innovation: Effective policy for encouraging commercialization of public research. Retrieved from http://meridian.aag.org/callforpapers/program/AbstractDetail.cfm?AbstractID=39974 Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities’ linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy, 37(8), 1205-1223. Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35(4), 481-501. Yang, C. H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J. R. (2009). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative?: Evidence from Taiwan. Research Policy, 38(1), 77-85. Youtie, J., & Shapira, P. (2008). Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy, 37(8), 1188-1204. Zawdie, G., Edmondson, J., & Triple Helix. (2010). Knowledge exchange and the Third Mission of universities: Introduction: The Triple Helix and the Third Mission – Schumpeter revisited. Industry and Higher Education, 24(3), 151-155. Zeng, S. X., Xie, X. M., & Tam, C. M. (2010). Relationship between cooperation networks and innovation performance of SMEs. Technovation, 30(3), 181-194. Zewe, C. F. (2006). Communicating the modern entrepreneurial university in the 21st century: A case study of academic capitalism and media messaging in the pursuit of revenues and national prominence at Louisiana State University. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (305318146).

Page 129 of 192

Page 130 of 192

Institute for Innovation and Technology Management Ted Rogers School of Management Ryerson University 55 Dundas Street Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 2K3 adopt.it@r yerson.ca 416-979-5000 ext. 4918 www.r yerson.ca/iitm @RyersonIITM

Page 131 of 192

Partnership Proposal Circular Innovation Council and the Eastern Ontario Leadership Council

Proposal Revised by: Jodi Houston, Program Manager Circular Innovation Council

Page 132 of 192

Summary In November 2023, the Circular Innovation Council (CIC) was invited by the Eastern Ontario Leadership Council (EOLC) to present on the potential for a circular economy through procurement. CIC suggested a partnership with EOLC building on previous work done with the City and County of Peterborough. At that time, CIC proposed hosting a market engagement workshop with vendors and suppliers to advance the circular economy and achieve social and environmental goals. CIC also recommended the creation of an Eastern Ontario Regional Buying Group as part of the newly launched Procure4Circular (P4C) Network. Joining the P4C network would enhance knowledge, build capacity, and foster collaborative procurement opportunities. The EOLC expressed interest in this partnership and invited CIC to discuss further with the Eastern Ontario Innovation Committee (EOIC). In response to the EOIC’s request, this document serves as a revised proposal and aims to:

summarize CIC’s vision and benefits for the regional partnership,
clarify the connection to CIC’s circular procurement work and Procure4Circular, and
propose a funding approach through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipal Fund Vision: The estimated annual economy of the Eastern Ontario Region is approximately 82.5 billion. Expanding the partnership beyond the City and County of Peterborough to include the Eastern Region is strategic because combining the collective buying power can greatly accelerate the transition to the circular economy while delivering on regional priorities simultaneously. Currently, procurement processes vary between municipalities and are siloed, limiting the potential to use procurement to address pressing regional issues. However, coordinating the collective buying power of the region and engaging with the market is a streamlined approach that will identify solutions to regional priorities such as integrated intelligent transportation systems, technology integration and innovation, and affordable housing. Engaging with the market allows for open and cooperative conversations, providing learning opportunities for both parties. This also builds the region’s capacity to understand the capabilities of the private sector in supporting the region’s objectives and promoting circularity. The proposal for the initial market engagement with the City and County involved sharing criteria and specifications developed for three spend categories (furniture, fleet, and textiles) to gather reactions and insights from the vendors and suppliers on their ability to provide environmentally preferred goods and services. The insights from the workshop would refine the criteria and specifications, ensuring positive outcomes for future procurements for these categories. This approach would also be applied to the regional partnership. Instead, the focus would expand to include region’s priorities and gain market insight on how to advance and achieve those goals. The procurement criteria and specifications would be developed based on the insights gathered from the workshop and may lead to a potential pilot project that could apply for funding through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipal Fund.

Page 133 of 192

It is important to acknowledge the efforts of the City and County to develop criteria and specifications for the three spend categories. Therefore, CIC also recommends including this work as part of the regional workshop to improve and standardize the current criteria and specifications already completed so that effort is not wasted. Such standardization of procurement criteria is highly welcomed by vendors and suppliers. Standardization criteria increases their ability to respond to tenders and helps build a business case for future investments. The investments can align with the region’s goals leading to economic development opportunities, job creation, and the delivery of environmental and social benefits like reduced waste and greenhouse gas emissions. Procure4Circular (P4C) As part of the newly launched Procure4Circular network, CIC recommended establishing an eastern Ontario buying group to share the process, outcomes and lessons learned from the market engagement with fellow network members. P4C is Canada’s first national public procurement network focused on using buying power to advance a circular economy. The network is comprised of individuals from all levels of government and the wider public sector and is organized by common spend categories. The spend categories include fleet and transportation, facility and building management, office and furniture supplies, food and catering, construction and renovation, and information technology. The P4C network is an ever-evolving, ever-scaling initiative that aims to advance the circular economy through the development of standardized procurement criteria, metrics, and key performance indicators to be tested through pilot projects. Participation is voluntary and participating would align with the objectives of the market engagement. Members of the Eastern Ontario group would gain valuable insight, build capacity and knowledge to share with colleagues, and have access to new approaches, initiatives, tools, and resources. Funding through the Green Municipal Fund To obtain project funding from the Green Municipal Fund, applicants must go through a predetermined process, which includes a feasibility study. CIC believes the proposed market engagement session could be framed as a feasibility study, demonstrating market readiness to drive outcomes related to the GMF project funding requirements. For example, the GMF has several funding streams, including active and low carbon transportation systems. The transportation funding stream could align with the regional priority of integrated intelligent transportation systems. The targets under this stream include reducing GHG emissions or energy use by a municipal fleet or fleet subset 20 percent below current baseline and have the potential to reduce vehicle kilometres travelled in single- occupancy vehicles by encouraging alternative modes of travel. The funding stream also requires a 20% reduction in GHG emissions and energy use below current baseline. The objectives of the Eastern Ontario Regional market engagement workshop could align with the outcomes of the funding stream and therefore, determine the feasibility and ability of the market to deliver a 20% reduction or more. This insight can then be used as evidence in the application to secure funding for pilot projects.

Page 134 of 192

Moreover, the City and County of Peterborough took part in the Circular Cities and Regions Initiative. The CCRI program for 2024-2025 was initiated on February 22, 2024, providing participants with funding and access to coaching services from circular economy experts. CIC has been selected by CCRI and FCM to offer expert guidance and coaching services to participating communities. Due to CIC being commissioned by this initiative to provide expert guidance, the ECOL could access funding, through the City and County’s participation in CCRI, to offset some of the expenses of the partnership and market engagement workshop. Additionally, CIC has already discussed the potential partnership with FCM representatives which has generated interest in creating a case study to share with the CCRI community. Conclusion In conclusion, we propose the following steps to move forward: • • • • • • •

Establish the EOLC buying group with Procure4Circular. Arrange a meeting with GMF to discuss the vendor engagement workshop and its relevance to the feasibility study requirement. Determine the approach and priorities for the market engagement workshop. Host the market engagement workshop. Submit proposal to fund pilot projects based on the results of the vendor engagement workshop. Develop case studies / implementation guide / webinars to bridge knowledge. Share insights and lessons learned with the Procure4Circular network.

Proposed Financial Commitment Cost Breakdown Task Management Execution Follow up

Description Preparation of workshop materials and customization Workshop Delivery (including travel costs) Wrap up Reporting – What heard summary

Total

Contact Jodi Houston Program Manager, Circular Procurement Circular Innovation Council 416.657.2797 ext. 5 jodi@circularinnovation.ca

Page 135 of 192

Projected Cost $1290.00 $3360.00 $1000.00 $5650.00

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan September 2023 update

By: Koren Lam and Kristen Myers

Page 136 of 192

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Table of Contents Executive summary …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Summary of themes across digital strategies ………………………………………………………………….. 1 Overarching themes and key takeaways across digital strategies in 2021 ………………………….. 1 Overarching themes and key takeaways across digital strategies in 2023 ………………………….. 1 An overview of digital strategies ………………………………………………………………………………………. 2 Federal digital strategies in Canada ……………………………………………………………………………….. 2 Provincial and regional digital strategies in Canada …………………………………………………………. 6 Municipal and local level digital strategies ……………………………………………………………………… 9 Indigenous digital strategies ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 18 International digital strategies …………………………………………………………………………………….. 22 An overview of broadband programs ………………………………………………………………………………. 50

Page 137 of 192

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Executive summary As a means to better understand current digital trends and revise its current Digital Strategy 2015-2024 amidst the onslaught of Covid-19, EORN undertook an environmental scan of existing digital strategies, programs and associated key performance measurements, within Canadian and international contexts in 2021. The following is an overview of the findings gathered from the environmental scan conducted in 2021, as well as additional research undertaken in 2023. The scan includes key information gathered within Canada at the federal, provincial, and municipal and local levels, as well as internationally, including those associated with national governments, regional institutions and inter-governmental bodies. Indigenous digital strategies and initiatives are also explored.

Page 138 of 192

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 139 of 192

Summary of themes across digital strategies Federal

Connectivity and access
Digital infrastructure (high quality networks)
Economic development
Competition
Partnerships
Data knowledge
Security and safety
Affordability
Spectrum
Innovation

Provincial

Connectivity and access
Economic development
Data knowledge
Digital infrastructure
Reconciliation
Innovation
Digital government
Digital skills
Community broadband models

Municipal 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

2021 Digital government Smart cities Economic development Digital infrastructure Consultation Inclusion Connectivity/access Partnerships

International

Digital Infrastructure
Security and safety
Accessibility, Connectivity, and Inclusiveness
Collaboration and partnerships
Digital Services
Accountability, trust, and transparency
Digital literacy and skills
Innovation
Data power and protection

Indigenous 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Governance Leadership Access Affordability Digital equity and inequity 6. Digital ability and skills development 7. Innovation 8. Resilience 9. Economic reconciliation 10. Infrastructure 11. Employment and business development

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 140 of 192

Connectivity
Data
Digital infrastructure
Connectivity
Economic development
Community broadband model
High quality network (resilient)

2023

Connectivity
Access
Digital service delivery
Connecting communities
Online services
New and emerging technologies
Digital and data governance
Digital literacy
Digital equity
Human rights and democracy
Privacy and security – protection of infrastructure and data privacy and security
Transparency and accountability
Collaboration and partnerships
Innovation
infrastructure and Healthy and vibrant communities and economic growth

Digital infrastructure Transparency Accessibility Trust Accountability Harmonization of regulations and policy 7. Innovation 8. New and emerging technologies 9. Resilience 10. Public service delivery 11. Data governance 12. Cyber security 13. Public safety 14. Affordable security 15. Collaboration and partnerships 16. Health care – telehealth, access, etc. 17. Digital workforce 18. Technology and Economic and social development 19. Entrepreneurship 20. Competitiveness 21. E-commerce 22. Digital transformation of businesses

Governance
Indigenous leadership in technology
Digital infrastructure
Relationship management
Partnerships and accountability
Resilience
Cyber security
Innovation
Online platforms
ICT capability
Digital equity and rights implementation
Accessibility and participation
Affordability
Digital ability
Data governance
Data access and repatriation
Data trust, ethics and OCAP (ownership, control, access and possession)

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Overarching themes and key takeaways across digital strategies in 2021

Digital infrastructure – improve accessibility, connectivity, affordability, and inclusiveness by investing in high quality networks that are resilient and provide high capacity (increased spectrum) in rural and remote areas
Digital knowledge– emphasis placed on digital skills and digital literacy. Knowing how to access the internet securely and safety, and accessing datasets from open government sources that build on accountability, trust and transparency
Partnerships and collaboration – collaboration amongst multi-level governments, private sector and community organizations is often required to build financial capacity and deliver large scale broadband projects
Data knowledge and protection- the power of data to guide decision-making and the need for better protection, safety and security when it comes to accessing and sharing data
Innovation – research and development in sustainable telecom technologies that could help lower carbon emissions
Honourable mention: Indigenous connectivity

Overarching themes and key takeaways across digital strategies in 2023 All key themes and trends across digital strategies explored in 2021 (as above) remained relevant to those explored during the 2023 update. However, there were a number of new trends, as well as themes which took on a greater level of importance.

Digital governance – coordination and harmonization of policy, governance principles, frameworks for trust and transparency across multiple levels of government, and across organizations and communities
Digitization of services – increase in public service delivery via online platforms, collaboration of platforms, quality of digital services, accessibility of services, transformation of existing digital services
New and emerging technologies – adoption of new technologies to expedite and improve service delivery
Technology supporting economic and social development – digital services, health care services, human rights, equity and inclusion, food security, connected communities, digital villages, adoption of technology for development and competitiveness, business development and improvement, ecommerce, and entrepreneurship
Cyber security – including affordable security, public safety, data protection, abuse prevention of cyber infrastructure, combating of cyber crime, cyber insurance, and security affordability
Resilience – while mentioned in the 2021 findings, a growing emphasis has been placed on resilience, including quality infrastructure and networks, flexible and secure infrastructure, resilience in the face of cyber security
Indigenous connectivity – digital equity, economic reconciliation, Indigenous rights, data access and repatriation, data trust, ethics and OCAP (ownership, control, access and possession)

Page 141 of 192

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 142 of 192

An overview of digital strategies Federal digital strategies in Canada Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

National/federal level 1.

Canada’s Connectivity Strategy (2019)

• • •

• • • • •

Connectivity/ access Digital infrastructure (resilient) High quality networks (bandwidth and latency) Partnerships Investments Economic development Data Affordability

•

• •

•

Canada’s Digital Charter (2019)

• • • •

Connectivity/access Economic development Digital government Digital infrastructure

•

The document serves as Canada’s first connectivity strategy with a focus on policy objectives that relate to bridging the digital divide, reducing regulatory barriers (reducing radio license fees, lowering pole attachment costs) and expanding the availability of spectrum Scalability of technological solutions (mix of wireline, wireless and satellite) must meet the connectivity demand for businesses and at residential premises o Anchor institutions/MUSH sites often require higher network speeds of up to 1 Gbps due to population density and need connectivity to deliver essential services (health, education) o Network infrastructure must be resilient, reliable and support low latency performance Broadband deployment has found to increase employment growth and average wage growth in service industries by 1.17 and 1.01 percentage points respectively per year in rural regions (Ivus and Boland, 2015) In 2018, only 41 per cent of rural households had access to high-speed Internet at 50/10 Mbps, compared with 98 per cent of urban homes, limiting their ability to participate in the digital economy and their potential for economic development. Forming partnerships amongst government levels can align application requirements, improve information, access to funding and program resources, transparency with relevant datasets In 2022, Bill C-27 (Digital Charter Implementation Act) was introduced and was amended to this charter. This bill would modernize the framework for the protection of personal information in the private sector and introduce new rules for the development and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). This bill mainly focuses on the broadcasting sector

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 143 of 192

• • • •

Data Privacy Affordability Competition

•

• 3.

Canada’s Digital Charter in Action (2019)

• • • • • •

Connectivity/access Economic development Digital government Digital infrastructure Data Privacy

• • •

Canada’s Digital Charter principles help address challenges and leverage unique talents and strengths in order to harness the power of digital and data transformation. 10 principles of the charter are mentioned below:

Universal access
Safety and security
Control and consent
Transparency, portability, and interoperability
Open and modern digital government
A level playing field
Data and digital for good
Strong democracy
Free from hate and extremism
Strong enforcement and real accountability The charter recognizes investment incentives for next generation technologies such as the need to accelerate the deployment of 5G connectivity. It also aims to modernize the privacy ecosystem to give more control to consumers using data-driven innovations (page 18) by examining changes to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (example: monitoring spam and electronic threats) Canadian research in artificial intelligence promotes collaboration, talent building. Canada works with international partners in the International Panel on Artificial Intelligence to support and guide responsible adoption of AI that is human centric (inclusion, diversity, innovation and economic growth). Certain partnerships include World Economic Forum on fourth Industrial Revolution on the development of data policy Programs: rural broadband – connecting families, accessible technology program, Cancode, Innovation and Skills Plan program, municipal modernization Provides a progress update on Canada’s digital charter in action During public consultation sessions, individuals noted technology will impact the labour market, unleash innovation, and every individual’s privacy and trust Rural and remote communities cannot unleash their potential innovation and are slow adopters of new technology because access to connectivity is limited

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 144 of 192

Rural Opportunity, National Prosperity: Canada’s Economic Development Strategy for Rural Canada (2019)

• • • • • •

Connectivity/access Data Economic development Digital literacy Digital infrastructure Affordability

•

• •

• 5.

Budget 2021: Recover plan for jobs, growth and resilience (2021)

• • •

Yesterday’s Gone: Exploring possible futures of Canada’s – Future Skills Centre and Brookfield (2021)

• • •

Connectivity Data Digital infrastructure

•

Connectivity/access Economic development Labour market

•

• •

•

In 2021, ISED published a progress report indicating the release of Statistics Canada Rural Data Hub for data specific to rural communities in Canada. The update also touched on new federal funding (Labour market, economic development, green infrastructure) for rural communities. The funding aims to “enhancing Canada’s competitiveness through digital adoption to improve productivity and manufacturing processes” and continue to build resiliency in a post-pandemic era Overview of economic development strategies for Canadian rural and remote communities. During the consultation process, the following themes were identified: higher access to connectivity, talent attraction and retention, improved infrastructure that is resilient to climate change Poor connectivity in rural areas remains a challenge for economic development elements (retaining youth, talent attraction, growing businesses, training new workers and adopting new technologies) Tracking rural aging public infrastructure remains a challenge because 60 per cent of Canadian municipalities have five staff members or fewer and own 49 per cent of infrastructure assets Programs: federal and provincial broadband programs, smart cities challenge, FCM’s asset management program Provides a breakdown of government stimulus to social, economic and cultural issues to help Canada recover from the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic A newly announced data commissioner role will ensure Canadians can trust their data is protected and ongoing standardization of data Programs: $1 billion added to UBF, Operation High Speed Quebec, data commissioner ($17.6 million over five years), industry wide data governance standard through SCC ($8.4 million over five years) Technology has impacted the future of work in Canada. Examples include automation and AI accelerating tasks in vertical industries, international talent attraction, and work from home capabilities The future of work in Canada could have an implication on the labour market. These include greater demand for social, emotional and metacognitive skills as a result of the expansion of virtual learning environments. Also, students who would not have been able to access training programs are able to do so over a virtual platform Increasing investments in space technology could open up new opportunities towards an emerging ‘space economy’

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 145 of 192

Waiting to Connect – Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) (2021)

• • •

Connectivity/access Indigenous Reconciliation/selfdetermination

•

This report discusses whether high throughput networks (1 Gbps) would solve the rural-digital divide. The findings indicate several rural communities might not be ready for embracing technology and existing access divides between have and have nots could increase (digital inequity) Remote and Indigenous communities are in higher need of ultra-fast broadband connectivity limiting self-determination and Indigenous economic reconciliation. Indigenous people work in industries with higher risk of job loss due to automation and will require the digital skills and literacy to fully use the internet Rural communities can assess the legal/regulatory, ethical, economic, social and policy (LESP) before broadband investments to ensure citizens are ready to embrace technology. Otherwise, technology can exacerbate existing disparities 2023

National/federal level 8. 2023–2026 • Data Strategy • for the Federal •

Public Service

Canada’s Digital Government Strategy (2022)

• • •

Connectivity Data Digital infrastructure

•

Connectivity Data Digital infrastructure

•

Data Strategy for the Federal Public Service is a document that sets renewed priorities, goals and expectations for the federal public service to use data as a strategic asset and improve outcomes for Canadians and others served by the government Four mission areas: the main focus of the strategy, which are data by design, data for decision-making, enabling data-driven services, and empowering the public service with talent and tools Historical and current issues that affect the quality/consistency of digital services across federal government, such as siloed services and data, fragmented IT infrastructure, technical debt, aging software/hardware, and talent recruitment/retention The progress and investments in digital transformation: the achievements/initiatives that the government has made to modernize/enhance its digital services, such as decommissioning legacy data centres, implementing cross-government IT solutions, supporting rural and remote connectivity, addressing COVID-19 impacts, and attracting tech employees with digital skills The future direction and vision for digital government: the guiding principles and goals that the government has set to become a truly digital government that delivers usercentric, secure, accessible and reliable services to Canadians and businesses

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 146 of 192

Provincial and regional digital strategies in Canada Jurisdiction

Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

Provincial level

Ontario

Building a Digital Ontario (2021)

• • • •

Connectivity Data Digital literacy Digital government

• • •

• • 2. Ontario

Alberta

ROMA Broadband Connectivity – municipal primer (November 2020) ROMA Broadband Connectivity: A Municipal Roadmap (2020) Government of Alberta Information Management and Technology

• •

• • • • •

Connectivity Community broadband model Digital government Digital equality Data

•

Connectivity High quality network (bandwidth and latency)

•

Increase digital uptake, participation and digital literacy by expanding access to high quality broadband, cellular internet, and forming a strategic data leadership council to help build digital capacity across government Developing a data rights portal and reviewing digital data standards with the public through consultations to protect Canadians New provincial data authority and AI framework supports high quality data access that is private, secure, anonymous for Canadians Implementing digital services for Canadians through the Simpler, Faster, Better Services Act and Ontario’s Digital and Data Directive, 2021 Current programs: Digital Main St., digital and data innovation fellows program, digital service squads, Ontario Works (device lending program) Broadband municipal toolkit and roadmap that provides council with the information and resources on existing and future broadband technologies, broadband models and investment partnerships. The first recommendation is to develop a provincial broadband strategy and showcase the SuperNet as a national leader in broadband deployment. Other recommendations were to accelerate broadband projects but also strategically invest in network infrastructure as data uptake trends continues to increase Broadband investments rely on multi-level government partnerships and governments should assess the level of digital capacity required at the community level Both documents provide an overview of the state of broadband in Alberta, more specifically rural areas. Technology opportunities, regulatory barriers and future investments will change

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 147 of 192

5 Year Strategic Plan (2016-2021) Cybera - State of Rural Alberta (2020)

• • • •

Nova Scotia

Review of Alternatives for Rural High-Speed Internet (2018) Nova Scotia Rural Internet Jurisdictional Scan (2018)

• • •

• •

Data Digital literacy Digital government Innovation

•

Connectivity Network quality Community broadband model Economic development Digital government

•

• •

SuperNet has allowed government to inter-connect between supporting citizens with services. The availability of government services in rural areas will play a significant part in digital literacy uptake Data is the foundation of Alberta’s future and the province must invest more in strategic pillars

Focus on citizens/organizations to deliver virtual services. There will be ongoing consultation throughout the process and business intelligence and analytics will identify, promote and provide information and services to citizens/organizations (example: open government action plan)
Culture of innovation and collaboration by working with IMT staff addressing program needs and sharing assets and knowledge across government sectors through communities of practice and implement tools and support to enable workforce ability
Digital government program/service delivery as streamlined official government records, implement green/sustainable practices to reduce carbon footprint
Implement a governance model, central management/stewardship for investments, and establish operating policy framework The provincial role in broadband delivery includes: strategic goals on connectivity, coordination of municipal and community initiatives, develop a community-based solution evaluation framework, coordination of provincial telecom procurement and infrastructure investment activities. Province could also step back and allow the TSP to work with private businesses/residents since demand is constant Results from the study showed that rural residents across Canada did not have access to broadband than urban counterparts. This is due to market failure and large investments towards network infrastructure Conducted a jurisdictional scan to understand how other governments are tackling the digital divide (access, affordability and technology) Bandwidth is a factor of broadband performance and is tied to internet access. Recommendations from this report include the lack of government policy enforcement for resilient and future proof technologies. Example: 50/10 Mbps standard which hinders other economic spillovers regarding lack of access

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 148 of 192

• •

•

British Columbia

B.C. Connectivity Report 2019 B.C. Connectivity Handbook 2019

• • • •

Connectivity Economic development Community broadband model High quality network (resilient)

• • •

•

Community broadband programs between multi-level governments and private sectors were recommended for the province Supplementary tools for community-based initiatives: business case templates, educational technology overviews, service provider database, education on government support programs for rural broadband, education on how to work with service providers, how to guide on raising community awareness of benefits and applications of broadband services In 2020, Internet for Nova Scotia Initiative projects (Develop Nova Scotia) have connected 90,000 homes and businesses with 50/10 Mbps. This project is leveraging $163 million from the provincial trust and working with other stakeholders for broadband projects. The project aims to connect the remaining underserved households Broadband for Rural Nova Scotia (BRNS) in 2007 and reached 99 per cent of rural households with 1.5 Mbps download service Internet service characteristics include access, affordability and speed Implementing a local level connectivity plan helps make better informed decisions to achieve economic and well-being benefits from connectivity and evaluate the infrastructure ROI Four pillars of value: Indigenous communities (right to self-determination and increased opportunity), SME in rural communities, digital equality, emergency alert and preparedness (increase in resilient communities and coordinate to reduce possible conflicts between assistance strategies) Programs: Connecting B.C. Program (1 B), pathways to technology, Connected Coast 2023

Provincial level 6. British Columbia

B.C. Provincial Digital Health Strategy (20212024)

• •

Connectivity Economic development

• •

The Digital Health Strategy guides B.C.’s effort to create a digitally enabled health system entrusted by all who use it B.C.’s Digital Health Strategy envisions a connected, trusted health system, which empowers all users and addresses our population health needs

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 149 of 192

•

High quality network (resilient)

•

The 2022-2025 Digital Health Strategy was developed with input of citizens, the Provincial Health Services Authority, the First Nations Health Authority, the five regional health authorities, and the doctors of B.C.

Municipal and local level digital strategies Jurisdiction

Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

County and regional levels 1.

Northumbe rland County

SMART Northumberland: an intelligent community (August 2019)

• • • • • • • • •

Middlesex County

Collaborative Service Delivery Review for Digital Transformation (2020)

• •

Smart cities Connectivity/acc ess Innovation Digital government Digital literacy Digital equality Advocacy Sustainability Economic development Consultation Connectivity Affordability

•

• • •

• •

•

The objective of this smart plan is to transform the rural county into an intelligent community by using technology and innovation to creative inclusivity and tackle social and governance challenges Broadband availability and capacity is the largest issue Recommendations to overcome broadband challenges would be to assess the state of fixed and mobile broadband and collaboration with multi-level government broadband projects Intelligent community indicators (broadband, knowledge workforce, innovation, digital equity, sustainability, and advocacy) were identified from public consultation sessions. By using implementation plans that touch on modernizing internal operations, service delivery and community focused, these metrics be ranked by priority and monitored over time Used the Lean Six Sigma and business process re-engineering for the county’s digital transformation County is unable to move toward an end-to-end digital service delivery due to the inadequate access (affordability and connectivity) of highspeed internet and thus the county continues to rely on a multi-service delivery model Programs: municipal modernization program, hotspot loan project

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 150 of 192

County of Renfrew

Digital Strategy RFP (No publication to date)

Digital transformation

•

Region of Durham

Connecting our Communities: A Broadband strategy for Durham Region

• • •

Community broadband model Economic development Consultation

•

Digital government Smart cities Innovation Data transparency Economic development Partnerships Consultation Digital equity Digital literacy

•

• •

Renfrew’s strategic plan 2016-2022 identifies the need to advance technology within the region to ensure residents and staff have fair, affordable, and reasonable access to technology. The plan references Renfrew to be top priority for EORN’s Cell Gap Project Internal digital transformation for staff and residents

The Region of Durham has undertaken a broadband project as a municipal services corporation and will partner with Oshawa Power Utilities Corporation to stimulate public-private partnership investment in rural areas of Durham A regional municipal approach simplifies permits and access to regional facilities for co-locating and permitting for TSP Smart cities framework would enhance Durham’s intelligent community status and would leverage funding, partnership opportunities and align with regional priorities under the strategic plan

City level 5.

City of Calgary

The City of Calgary Digital Strategy (2014)

• • • • • • • • •

Reviewed how the City of Calgary can improve better information to residents, enhance technology and improve operations and cost-effective solutions through technology. Citizens are given the power to become active and inclusive in this process through consultations. The following are digital strategy objectives:

Reliable government services are accessible on a self-service basis and available if the user is in a fixed/mobile location
Foster collaboration amongst strategic partners with aligned goals and embrace a digital economy
Give citizens access to public information while being transparent on data protection and the collection of information
Focus on public participation (forums, emerging opportunities to participate, innovative use of technology for public consultations Innovation is required to keep pace with private industry, to lower costs and to build partnerships with other organizations and internally

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 151 of 192

City of Kitchener

Digital Kitchener (2021)

• • • • • • • •

Digital government Connectivity (increased public Wi-Fi areas) Economic development Data transparency Consultation Smart cities Digital literacy Digital equity

•

Vision to transform the City of Kitchener and leverage technology to become smarter and connected. There are four main themes identified in this strategy: • Connected

Telecom infrastructure with access and capacity required to remain competitive. These future proof technologies will rely on fibre optic broadband and wireless networks
Create municipal assets to service providers through the use of policy tools and streamlining processes to create new partnership opportunities for community benefit
Wireless access should be more of a seamless service (Public Wi-Fi)
Smarter infrastructure to the city can be more competitive, productive and attractive place to live and work. Using connected sensors to encourage the city as an incubator to pilot smart tech projects • Innovative
Continue to advocate for the city’s mobile strategy and ensure corporate policies are in place to empower creative workforce (remote work and hybrid)
Explore digital procurement processes • On demand: municipal online service delivery to increase engagement and connectivity while offering convenience and intuitive. Using information in more dynamic ways to inform decision making • Inclusive: ensure residents have equitable access to the benefits of a smart city
Work with community organizations to identify public access needs and address them collaboratively
Establish a baseline of service level standard for public tech and internet access across the city
Increase digital literacy by working with economic development, library to support community tech programming and have local tech sector promote digital inclusion initiatives Next steps

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 152 of 192

Invest in technologies, processes and initiatives that support our goals 2. Create partnerships that strengthen and sustain initiatives 3. Bring Digital Kitchener to life for every citizen to understand and embrace 1.

City of Hamilton

Digital Transformation and Smart City (2021)

• • • •

Digital government Smart cities Data Innovation

• • •

Digital strategy focuses on enabling open government and citizencentered Reviewed digital tools and technology to enhance user experience in services, efficiencies and productivity Main components

Smart city strategy: maximize resources and enabling sustainability through technology
Digital strategy: enabling open government by delivering services online and is complemented by internal digital transformation using data sharing and analytics to drive decisions
Open data program: meaningful high quality municipal data that is publicly available
Digital service channels: e-service delivery through a digital platform (web/mobile app)

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 153 of 192

2023 City level 8. City of Hamilton

City of Hamilton’s Digital Strategy

• •

• • • • •

• •

Improve digital service delivery Access to digital tools and training, empowering workforce Digital governance Digital delivery standards Digital literacy Data privacy and security Digital document and record management Transparency and accountability Collaboration

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 154 of 192

The City of Waterloo

Digital Services Strategy Final Report March 2023

• •

•

Digital services New and emerging technologies Online services Adoption of technology to speed up services Equitable services

•

The strategy sets out a vision for the city to start its journey to become a more service-centred, digital organization – one that rethinks services to take advantage of new and emerging technology capabilities. It targets delivering more city services online, in ways that make services more accessible and convenient – available 24 x 7, and available from anywhere; while ensuring all services continue to be available across all channels – including phone and face-to-face for those who don’t wish to or cannot use digital services. It envisages using service and process redesign and the adoption of new technology to speed up delivery of services and to make services easier, less labour intensive, and less costly to operate and manage

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 155 of 192 10.

Town of Milton

Town of Milton Digital Strategy August 2022

• • • • •

Connecting the community Collaborative platforms Digital service delivery Automation and mobility Data analytics

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 156 of 192 11.

City of Toronto

Digital infrastructure Strategic framework City of Toronto March 2022

• • • • • •

•

• •

Equity and inclusion Access Data governance Human rights Digital literacy and adoption Interaction between digital infrastructure and healthy and vibrant communities and economic growth Privacy and security – protection of infrastructure Democracy Transparency

Digital Infrastructure Strategic Framework Scope:

Principle: equity and inclusion Vision: digital Infrastructure will be used to create and sustain equity, inclusion, accessibility, and human rights in its operations and outcomes. Digital Infrastructure will be flexible, adaptable and human-centred, responding to the needs of all Torontonians, including Indigenous, Black, equity-deserving groups, and those with accessibility needs
Principle: a well-run city Vision: digital Infrastructure will enable high quality, resilient and innovative public services, and support the use of data and evidence to inform decisionmaking
Principle: society, economy and the environment Vision: digital Infrastructure will enhance quality of life for Torontonians, support economic prosperity, and advance environmental sustainability, while also avoiding potential harms that could result from its use
Principle: privacy and security Vision: Toronto will uphold human dignity, autonomy and safety by limiting the collection of personal information, implementing safeguards that uphold

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 157 of 192

Principle: democracy and transparency Vision: decisions about Digital Infrastructure will be made democratically, in a way that is ethical, accountable, transparent, and subject to oversight. Torontonians will be provided with understandable, timely, and accurate information about the technologies in their city, and opportunities to shape the digital domain
Principle: digital autonomy Vision: the city will maintain control in the selection, use and design of its Digital Infrastructure, so that it—and its residents—can act with autonomy and in a self-determined manner within the digital realm

City of Oakville

2022 Digital Plan Progress Report and Look Ahead

• • • •

• •

Connected communities Partnerships Data management Digital infrastructure – economical and social Online services Access to services and information

The 2022 Digital Oakville Plan: connected community through online services • Improve the ease, speed, and experience for residents to access information, programs, and services, safely and securely • Adopt a customer-centric approach to designing digital tools and services Connected community through partnership and data management • Make better use of data and analytics to drive evidence-based decisions • Establish partnerships with private, public and academic leaders Connected community through digital infrastructure • Create pilot projects to test out smart technologies • Engage partners to help find new applications and benefits of technologies • Continue investing in the town’s digital infrastructure to support livability and economic development Connected community through continuous improvement • Encourage a “build-measure-learn” approach to service and process design • Build a continuous improvement culture • Seek opportunities to enhance services, streamline internal processes, build efficiencies, and continuously improve the quality of service delivered

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 158 of 192

Indigenous digital strategies Jurisdiction

Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

Indigenous (Canada)

Pathways to Technology – Connecting 203 FN across B.C. (2020)

• • •

Governance Digital inequity Innovation

•

Indigenous Digital Equity Strategy (2023-2033)

• • •

Equity Resilience Economic reconciliation Innovation Leadership Infrastructure Skills development Employment and business development

•

Access Affordability Digital ability Digital inclusion

•

• • • • •

Indigenous (Australia)

Indigenous Digital Inclusion Plan (IDIP) (2021)

• • • •

•

• • •

Using ownership, control, access, and possession (Indigenous research approach) to understand barriers to access (increased technology partnership, mentorship opportunities) Programs: Pathways to Technology (Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Training’s Sector Labour Market Partnerships Program) The First Nations Technology Council is currently co-creating an Indigenous Digital Equity Strategy as a focused, strategic response that will achieve digital equity and nurture long-term resilience and self-determination for our communities The vision for the strategy is to help coordinate a comprehensive and collaborative approach to achieving digital equity, technological advancement, and economic reconciliation for Indigenous peoples in B.C., while stimulating the needed investment for implementation and adoption The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has identified the government must provide safety for Indigenous women and children, and increased funding for access to technical resources (41 and 54). Connectivity access to mobile services The Indigenous Digital Inclusion Plan (IDIP) is being developed by the National Indigenous Australians Agency, with support from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications This work is part of the Australian government’s response to the recommendations of the 2018 Regional Telecommunications Review The IDIP will address key issues to improve Indigenous digital inclusion in the three areas of: access, affordability and digital ability The IDIP is being developed in consultation with Indigenous organisations and communities, businesses and government agencies during 2021. Consultation will include a series of virtual round tables with key

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 159 of 192

stakeholders and follow up discussions and an opportunity for stakeholders to provide a submission on the key issues to the IDIP

2023 4.

The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) (Australia)

AIATSIS Digital Strategy 2021– 2030

First National Technology Council

Indigenous Digital • Equity Strategy •

• • • • • •

•

• • •

Infrastructure Support Cyber security Resilience Innovation and online platforms ICT capability

•

Governance Digital inequity Digital equity and rights implementation Innovation Accessibility and participation Indigenous leadership in technology

•

This digital strategy presents a view of investment and action over a longterm period, to 2030, which will deliver new capabilities across ICT domains of: o Systems o Supporting technology o Digital services and skills o Data and information o Cyber security The commitments made through this digital strategy will prepare AIATSIS for an expanding role in providing services via digital channels, drive greater efficiency and innovation, and sustain capability to deliver high quality research and collection management well into the future. • Strategy: https://aiatsis.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-08/aiatsis-digitalstrategy-2021-2030.pdf

•

• •

•

A First Nations-led initiative that aims to achieve digital equity and uphold First Nations rights and influence the future of technology The legacy of colonialism in Canada that has failed to recognize Indigenous rights and excluded them from equitably participating in digital society, which has reinforced colonial practices and inhibited Indigenous selfdetermination A comprehensive, coordinated, and community-led approach that is rooted in First Nations’ inherent title, rights, and treaty rights, and that asserts the right to own, control, access, influence, and steward digital technology A collaborative and inclusive process that engages a diverse group of rightsholders and subject matter experts to contribute to the strategy, with a steering committee and policy and planning circles to guide the work The key areas that the strategy will address, such as connectivity, data sovereignty, digital literacy, innovation and economic development, culture

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 160 of 192

and language, health and wellness, education and lifelong learning, governance and leadership 6.

First Nations Information Governance Centre

A First Nations Data Governance Strategy (2020)

• • • • • • • •

Data governance Digital Infrastructure Indigenous rights Relationship management Data access and repatriation Data collection Data management Data trust, ethics and OCAP

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 161 of 192

National Indigenous Australians Agency (Governmen t of Australia)

First Nations Digital Inclusion Plan (2023-26)

• • • • • • •

Access Affordability Digital inclusion Digital ability Leadership in digital inclusion Partnerships and accountability Data

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 162 of 192

International digital strategies Jurisdiction/ area

Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

National level 1.

United Kingdom

Digital Data and • Technology Strategy: 2021 • to 2024 (April 2021) • •

The Seven Pillars of the Digital Strategy. U.K. Minister of State for Digital Matt Hancock’s address to the Institute of Directors’ Digital Strategy Summit. (2017). The ‘Ten Tech Priorities’ behind the U.K.’s 2021 Digital Strategy - Lexology Herbert Smith Freehills. (2021).

• • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

Culture, people and skills • The U.K. government’s Digital, Data and Technology (DDaT) strategy, lists five key interconnected aims for the strategy (as Engagement pictured left). Continuous improvement Technology and security foundation Data for decision making Digital infrastructure • Speech given by U.K. Minister of State for Digital Matt Hancock to the Institute of Directors’ Digital Strategy Summit 2017. Digital skills Outlines seven pillars in the U.K. government’s digital strategy Digital business support Safety strategy Digitize government Power of data and improving public confidence Ten priorities form the foundation of the U.K.’s digital strategy: Digital infrastructure

Rolling out world-class digital infrastructure nationwide Power of data
Unlocking the power of data Tech savviness
Building a tech-savvy nation Safety and security
Keeping the U.K. safe and secure online Fueling start-ups and
Fuelling a new era of start-ups and scaleups scaleups
Unleashing the transformation power of tech and AI Tech and AI
Championing free and fair digital trade Free and fair digital
Leading the global conversation on tech trade
Levelling up the digital prosperity across the U.K. Digital prosperity
Using digital innovation to reach net zero Digital innovation

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 163 of 192

United States

Digital Government Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People

• • •

Accessibility and access • US digital strategy. Retrieved from the Obama administration to services website (n.d.) Security and affordability • The digital government strategy sets out to accomplish three things: Unlock the power data

Enable the American people and an increasingly mobile to spur innovation and workforce to access high-quality digital government improve quality of information and services anywhere, anytime, on any device services
Ensure that as the government adjusts to this new digital world, we seize the opportunity to procure and manage devices, applications, and data in smart, secure and affordable ways
Unlock the power of government data to spur innovation across our nation and improve the quality of services for the American people • To drive this transformation, the strategy is built upon four overarching principles:
An “information-centric” approach – moves us from managing “documents” to managing discrete pieces of open data and content which can be tagged, shared, secured, mashed up and presented in the way that is most useful for the consumer of that information
A “shared platform” approach – helps us work together, both within and across agencies, to reduce costs, streamline development, apply consistent standards, and ensure consistency in how we create and deliver information
A “customer-centric” approach – influences how we create, manage, and present data through websites, mobile applications, raw data sets, and other modes of delivery, and allows customers to shape, share and consume information, whenever and however they want it
A platform of “security and privacy” – ensures this innovation happens in a way that ensures the safe and secure delivery and use of digital services to protect information and privacy

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 164 of 192

United States

Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. Federal Communications Commission. (2010).

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Affordability, • The U.S. National Broadband Plan. The long-term goals of the accessibility and cost plan are: barriers

At least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable Innovation access to actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits Digital skills and literacy/ per second and actual upload speeds of at least 50 megabits inclusion per second by the year 2020 Public safety and
The United States should lead the world in mobile security innovation, with the fastest and most extensive wireless Infrastructure networks of any nation Capacity
Every American should have affordable access to robust Health care services broadband service, and the means and skills to subscribe if Education- online they so choose Data
Every American community should have affordable access to Transparency at least 1 gigabit per second broadband service to anchor Innovation institutions such as schools, hospitals, and government Energy and environment buildings Economic development

To ensure the safety of the American people, every first Civic engagement responder should have access to a nationwide, wireless, Government interoperable broadband public safety network performance 6. To ensure that America leads in the clean energy economy, every American should be able to use broadband to track and manage their real-time energy consumption • The plan also aimed to reallocate spectrum to increase capacity of mobile broadband

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 165 of 192

Germany

Digital Strategy for Germany 2025.

• • • • • • • •

Availability, capacity and • The Digital Strategy 2025 program demonstrates how the latency German government’s Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Assisting start-ups Energy (BMWi) has been setting priorities in recent years, Company collaboration developing capabilities and using new tools to make a digitised Regulatory framework Germany possible for investment and • Focus of the strategy consists of: innovation • Creating a gigabit optical fibre network for Germany by 2025, Data security focusing on availability, capacity, latency Smart networks • Launching the new start-up era: assisting start-ups and Fostering digital encouraging cooperation between young companies and technology research established companies Digital education • Creating a regulatory framework for more investment and • • • • • • •

innovation Encouraging “smart networks” in key commercial infrastructure areas of our economy Strengthen data security and developing informational autonomy Enabling new business models for SMEs, the skilled craft sector and services Utilising Industry 4.0 to modernise Germany as a production location Creating excellence in digital technology research, development and innovation Introducing digital education to all phases of life. School and vocational training Creating a digital agency as a modern centre of excellence

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 166 of 192

Germany

5G Strategy for Germany to 2025

• • • •

5G Digital infrastructure Cooperation Research and development

•

Australia

Vision 2025. We will deliver world-leading digital services for the benefit of all Australians. Digital Transformation Agency. (2018).

• • • • •

Services Secure access Data Trust and transparency Digital capability and skills Infrastructure Accountability Partnerships

•

• • •

A scheme to promote the development of Germany to become a lead market for 5G networks and applications

Government of Australia’s digital strategy and vision to 2025. Focus of the strategy is on government digital services • Three strategic priorities:

Government that’s easy to deal with • Intuitive and convenient services • Integrated services supporting your needs and life events • Digital identity for easy and secure access
Government that’s informed by you • Smart services that adapt to the data you choose to share • Greater insights for better services • Trust and transparency
Government that’s fit for the digital age • Expanding digital capability • Developing modern infrastructure • Providing accountability

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 167 of 192

Inter-governmental and regional digital strategies 7.

OECD

Recommendations of the Council on Digital Governance Strategies. OECD. (2014).

• • • •

• • •

• •

Transparency, openness The recommendations are to help governments adopt more strategic approaches for a use of technology that spurs more open, and inclusiveness participatory and innovative governments. Recommends that Engagement in policy governments develop and implement digital governance strategies: making • Which ensure greater transparency, openness and Data driven culture in inclusiveness of government processes and operations public sector • Encourage engagement and participation of public, private and Risk management in civil society stakeholders in policy making and public service digital security and design and delivery privacy • Create a data driven culture in the public sector Secure government • Reflect a risk management approach to addressing digital commitment security and privacy issues and include the adoption of Coherent use digital effective and appropriate security measures technologies Organizational and Recommends that, in developing their digital governance strategies, governance frameworks government should: to implement digital • Secure leadership and political commitment to the strategy strategy • Ensure coherent use of digital technologies across policy Institutional capacity areas and levels of government Legal and regulatory • Establish effective organisational and governance frameworks which frameworks to co-ordinate the implementation of the digital support digital strategy within and across levels of government opportunities Recommends that, in implementing the digital government strategies, governments should: • Develop clear business cases to sustain the funding and focused implementation of digital technologies projects • Reinforce institutional capacity to manage and monitor projects’ implementation • Procure digital technologies based on assessment of existing assets- digital skills, job profiles, technologies, etc. • Ensure that general and sector-specific legal and regulatory frameworks allow digital opportunities to be seized

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 168 of 192

United Nations

Report of the Secretary- • General. Roadmap for Digital Cooperation. (June 2020). • •

•

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

UNDP Digital Strategy 2019

• • •

• • • •

An inclusive digital • In July 2018, the secretary-general convened a high-level economy and society: panel on digital cooperation to advance proposals to global connectivity, digital strengthen cooperation in the digital space among public goods, digital governments, the private sector, civil society, international inclusion organizations, academic institutions, the technical community and other relevant stakeholders Human and institutional capacity: digital capacity • The report is aimed at, first, summarizing the state of play in building relation to each of the panel’s recommendations, incorporating the subsequent consultations on follow-up, Human rights and human and second, setting out in the concluding observations the agency: digital human envisaged action points for the way forward rights, artificial intelligence Trust, security and stability Global digital cooperation Leadership • The UNDP Digital Strategy will be implemented through an activation plan. The Digital Strategy Activation Plan runs through Enable information to the end of 2021, in unison with the Strategic Plan. The technology- align IT and activation plan consists of three workstreams that will establish digital strategies a foundation upon which the entirety of UNDP can seek out and Foster innovation embrace existing and emerging digital technology to better Digital literacy serve its partners in their efforts to achieve the SDGs Digital communication Digital technology for

Workstream 1: establish leadership for the digital development transformation • Chief digital - UNDP officer • Digital champions
Workstream 2: enable information technology (IT) to deliver the digital transformation • Alignment of IT strategy and digital strategy • Service-oriented IT as a business partner
Workstream 3: empower and inspire the business and increase digital capabilities and capacities • Foster innovation

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 169 of 192

• • • •

Digital literacy Digital communication Alliances and ecosystems Lighthouse initiatives

The activation plan is informed by these core principles: • Digital enables the business • Capacity should service clients first • Data is knowledge • Start small and scale fast 10. European Union Smart Villages and rural • digital transformation. • European Network for Rural Development and the European Commission. • (n.d.). • •

Accessibility • This thematic briefing is one of the tools developed by the ENRD to assist managing authorities and rural stakeholders in Stakeholder involvement designing and implementing smart villages initiatives in key in identification of digital domains. The focus of this document is on promoting digital needs transformation in villages and rural areas Support for digital • What are the conditions that managing authorities need to transition ensure in smart villages to support digital transformation? Cooperation o Access to connectivity Connection o Mechanisms for involving local stakeholders in the identification of digital needs and in the co-creation of digital solutions need to be in place o Villages must have access to intermediaries, brokers and ‘spaces’ to support digital transition o Cooperation with other digital players in wider regional and national ecosystems need to be supported Assess the digital maturity of smart villages:

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 170 of 192

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 171 of 192

European Union Smart Villages- how to ensure that digital strategies benefit rural communities. European Network for Rural Development and the European Commission. (n.d.).

• • • • • • • • •

Broadband infrastructure Uptake of digital services Digital skills and literacy Rural innovation ecosystems Coordinated governance Vision and strategy Engagement Build business case Digital skills and literacy partnerships

•

This briefing document looks at how the digital strategies, that are being developed at different levels across Europe, can benefit rural communities. It is based upon work carried out in the ENRD Thematic Group on smart villages • Smart villages are places where rural communities are empowered and are taking the initiative to find solutions to the challenges they face • Overcoming the digital divide in rural areas: o Broadband infrastructure. Investment in broadband infrastructure needs to be mapped against socioeconomic benefits o Promoting the uptake of digital services. Important to work with the community itself to develop and promote the uptake of digital services in rural regions o Digital skills and literacy. Digital skills must be delivered alongside digital infrastructure to enable people to benefit from it o These key points range from thinking more holistically about infrastructure; to how digital skills can be delivered, and how innovation ecosystems can help to drive the development of rural digital services. The benefits can only be mobilised when there is a coordinated governance, from a national to local scale and involving multiple stakeholders: • Targeting investments in broadband infrastructure • Strategies to build digital skills • Creating rural innovation ecosystems • Building coordinated governance • Recommendations: • Do not wait for ultra-fast broadband to arrive. Bring together local users, public bodies, suppliers and researchers to review digital needs and opportunities,

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 172 of 192

•

build a vision of the future and a strategy for getting there • Aggregate demand, build a business case and a financial plan for investments in key areas Recommendations: • Upskill local stakeholders to deliver the training initiatives, including both local people and local organisations, municipalities and service providers. • Identify and enable digital champions Recommendations: • Map and identify the key gaps and opportunities in the local digital ecosystem to produce a road map which focuses on the most promising areas • A key mechanism is the support for the development of ‘enablers’ and ’multipliers’ such as living laboratories, fab-labs and various forms digital hubs within villages and rural settlements to link regional level initiatives to local communities Recommendations: • Support for partnerships between stakeholders at a regional and local level. This includes the telecoms /infrastructure providers, regional municipalities, regional NGOs and rural community organisations • Implement a range of software and supportive applications to interconnect different systems (egovernance, distant learning and upskilling, etc.), combining the various services and initiatives implemented in different areas (example: mobility, public services, education, health, etc.)

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 173 of 192

European Union The four pillars of a digital • strategy. Maria Demeritsiz. • (2021). • •
Across eight different countries

Seven pivots for • government’s digital transformation. William D. • Eggers, Jason Manstof, Pankaj Kamleshkumar • Kishnani, and Jean Barroca. (2021). • • •

Digital skills Digital infrastructure Cooperation Engagement

Data for efficiency and service delivery Flexible and secure infrastructure Open talent networksdigital competencies Engagement via ecosystems Intelligent workflows Innovation and new business models for service delivery

Commentary on the E.U.’s digital compass to help advance E.U. ambitions for a digital transformation by 2030

Ethics
Social fabric
The economy
Security

ensure more citizens and professionals have basic digital skills
provide sustainable digital infrastructure, promote the digital transformation of private
businesses and public services and encourage a system of cooperation between member states to monitor and promote these goals • Study is based on a survey of more than 800 government executives across eight countries with varied sectors and levels of governments. The survey also included 2,000 executives from the private sector sampled across industries. We analyzed these responses to understand the digital maturity of organizations sampled • Seven digital pivots which an organization or government must have to become truly digital were identified:

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 174 of 192

Nordic Countries Rural perspective on and Latvia digital innovation: Experiences from small enterprises in the Nordic countries and Latvia. Nordregio. (2020).

• • • • • • •

Broadband infrastructure • Connectivity Framing digitalizationdigital literacy Digital education Local initiatives to support digitalization Collaboration Company-centred approach

Overall conclusions from the project, along with advice for policy makers about how to best support rural and sparsely populated areas to make the most of the opportunities digitalisation offers: • • • •

• • •

• •

Continue to work towards broadband infrastructure provision targets until every last household is connected Acknowledge the stage companies are at in their digital journey Frame digitalisation in a way that small enterprises in rural areas can relate to Take an individualised approach that generates a dialogue between technical experts and experts in traditional industries Develop locally anchored initiatives to support SMEs in rural areas to engage with digitalisation Focus on the development potential digitalisation presents Work collaboratively with the local community to address the implications of increased digital media attention for tourism sites Take a company-centred approach and promote mutually beneficial collaboration Create opportunities for cross-border collaboration between participants in successful locally driven digitalisation initiative

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 175 of 192

ITU Member The Benchmark for Fifth States- includes Generation Collaboration 193 countries Regulation- Abstract. International Telecommunications Union (ITC). (n.d.)

• • • •

• • • • •

Collaborative governance • Policy design Regulatory collaboration Principles of law and • regulation: • Forward looking • Evidence based • Innovation base • Inclusive Accessibility Data protection Security Digital services Infrastructure

The G5 Benchmark is a powerful, straightforward tool for policymakers and regulators. It enables you to track how regulatory frameworks are evolving in the digital economy and dives deep into policy trends The G5 Benchmark is based on data provided by ITU member state administrations through annual ITU surveys. Additional research was carried out to complement the dataset The new G5 Benchmark takes data from 157 countries and expands to cover four pillars, with 66 indicators taken into account. Each country can score itself, with a 100-point maximum. The pillars are: • National collaborative governance • Policy design principles • Digital development • Digital economic policy agenda: • Collaboration is the dominant element – the very watermark of G5 regulation. It measures the breadth and depth of cross-sector collaboration between the ICT regulator and her/his peers. This track factors in institutional set-up (agencies and their mandate) as well as practices around regulatory collaboration, formal and informal (see Table 2). Digital regulation now occurs across a network of centres of expertise and enforcement. Shared focus and accountability among government agencies and stakeholders is replacing the ICT silo model, and the G5 Benchmark reflects this trend

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 176 of 192

2023 National level 16. United Kingdom The U.K.’s International Technology Strategy

• • • •

Priority actions: Cross government implementation plan International approach guided by four principles: • Open Values based technology leadership • Responsible Collaborative • Secure expertise and support • Resilient Principles Six strategic priorities:

International partnerships for global leadership
Values-based governance
Technology investment and expertise for the developing world
Technology to drive the U.K. economy
Protecting security interests
Priority technologies • Artificial intelligence • Quantum tech • Engineering biology • Semiconductors • Telecos

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 177 of 192

United Kingdom Government Cyber (2022-2030) Security Strategy

• • •

Vision: strategy seeks to ensure that core government functions – Cyber security and from the delivery of public services to the operation of national resilience Public service delivery security apparatus – are resilient to cyber attack, strengthening the U.K. as a sovereign nation and cementing its authority as a Data protection democratic power and responsible cyber power.

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 178 of 192

United States Government

National cybersecurity strategy March 2023

• • • • • •

• • • • • • •

Pillar one | defend critical infrastructure Cyber security Strategic objective 1.1: establish cybersecurity requirements to support national security and Public safety public safety • Establish cybersecurity regulations to secure critical infrastructure Harmonize regulations • Harmonize and streamline new and existing regulation Affordable security • Enable regulated entities to afford security Dismantling threat actors Strategic objective 1.2: scale public-private collaboration Strategic objective 1.3: integrate federal cybersecurity centers Collaboration and Strategic objective 1.4: update federal incident response plans and processes Strategic objective 1.5: modernize federal defenses partnerships o Public-private Pillar two | disrupt and dismantle threat actors Strategic objective 2.1: integrate federal disruption activities collab Strategic objective 2.2: enhance public-private operational collaboration to disrupt adversaries o Collaboration Strategic objective 2.3: increase the speed and scale of intelligence sharing and victim between levels of notification Strategic objective 2.4: prevent abuse of U.S.-based infrastructure government Strategic objective 2.5: counter cybercrime, defeat ransomware o International Pillar three | shape market forces to drive security and resilience partners Strategic objective 3.1: hold the stewards of our data accountable Abuse prevention of cyber Strategic objective 3.2: drive the development of secure IOT devices Strategic objective 3.3: shift liability for insecure software products and services infrastructure Strategic objective 3.4: use federal grants and other incentives to build in security Strategic objective 3.5: leverage federal procurement to improve accountability Combat cyber crime Strategic objective 3.6: explore a federal cyber insurance backstop Resilience Data stewardship Pillar four | invest in a resilient future Strategic objective 4.1: secure the technical foundation of the internet Accountability Strategic objective 4.2: reinvigorate federal research and development for cybersecurity Strategic objective 4.3: prepare for our post-quantum future Cyber insurance Strategic objective 4.4: secure our clean energy future Cyber workforce Strategic objective 4.5: support development of a digital identity ecosystem Strategic objective 4.6: national strategy to strengthen our cyber workforce development Pillar five | forge international partnerships to pursue shared goals Strategic objective 5.1: build coalitions to counter threats to digital ecosystem Strategic objective 5.2: strengthen international partner capacity Strategic objective 5.3: expand U.S. ability to assist allies and partners Strategic objective 5.4: build coalitions to reinforce global norms of responsible state behavior Strategic objective 5.5: secure global supply chains for information, communications, and operational technology products and services

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 179 of 192

State level 19. Queensland, Australia

Digital Strategy for Rural • and Remote Health Care - • 10 year plan • • • • •

Integrated care Telehealth Health care access Virtual care Digital health hub Leverage digital tech to improve health care Drone delivery

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 180 of 192

County level 20. County of Hertfordshire, U.K

Digital and technology strategy 2023-27

There are four parts to this strategy:

• • • • •

Knowledge and collaboration Customer experience and self-service Data and decisionmaking Technology and integration

For residents • • • • • •

Web services so good, people prefer to do things online Can still access services in a non-digital way Consistent experience when accessing services Improved skills and confidence to use online and digital services Can get help and give feedback easily Provide information once

For staff • • • • • •

A more innovative and customer-focused culture The right equipment and systems to do the job Better access to accurate, relevant data Capacity to plan and improve services based on data Flexibility to do the job, especially when out and about Skills and confidence to use the technology

For businesses and partners • • • • • •

Easier ways to communicate and do business with us Clear roles and responsibilities between organisations Be a part of improving services More joined up services with better sharing of data and best practice Investment in local economy Links with local skills initiatives

Provide information once

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 181 of 192

City level 21. City of Sacramento, California

City of Sacramento Information Technology, Digital Strategy Summary 2022-2023

• • • • • •

Transparency Accountability Sustainable Innovation Collaboration Partnerships

Our plan is ambitious, broad, and comprehensive. It covers many aspects including vision, governance, structure, and initiatives. Our strategy ensures that investments are sound, equitable, and deliver the highest possible value to the city and its constituents. We will: • • •

Deliver IT services that enable Sacramento to be a leader in public service known for our transparency accountability and integrity Build a sustainable, reliable, and agile IT organization aligned with the city’s business requirements, goals, and objectives Create an environment of innovation and collaborative working relationships with the community, businesses, city staff and our customers

Goals:

Digital - expand access to city services to anyone, at any time, from anywhere (responsive, touchless, accessible and mobile)
Innovative - transform the city’s services delivery through new and creative solutions
Dynamic - create a dynamic workforce that is well trained, self-reliant, responsive, and adaptable
Partner - create a citywide community of partnerships with citizens, businesses, communities, higher education and a wide array of stakeholders

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 182 of 192

Inter-governmental and regional strategies 22. OECD (2022)

• Assessing National Digital Strategies and • Their Governance, OECD • Digital Economy Papers May 2022 No.324 • •

• • • • • • •

Access Paper explores, compares and evaluates national digital Trust strategies from around the world. Labour market and skills – regional development Innovation Society – environment, health care, digital government, skills Market openness – trade, investment competition Data governance Entrepreneurship Competitiveness Policy coordination Governance Policy landscape

Many countries have turned to a national digital strategy as a tool towards digital transformation, but the content and governance of national digital strategies can vary significantly across countries, and questions have arisen as to what a comprehensive national digital strategy should cover and how to govern it. This report provides key answers to these questions. The new NDSC indicator presented in this report measures the comprehensiveness of national digital strategies benchmarked against the seven dimensions of the Framework, providing insights into the potential of a country’s NDS to co-ordinate policies across domains. The results indicate, for example, that policies under the

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 183 of 192

access dimension are on average the most comprehensive across countries, which reflects the strong tradition of ICT sector specific strategies, such as for broadband development. On the other hand, much scope remains for national digital strategies to better reflect and co-ordinate policies under the jobs and market openness dimensions. Governance of national digital strategies has evolved in line with the growing importance of digital transformation policies and the need for stronger leadership and more effective co-ordination of such policies via national digital strategies. This is evident in the trend towards allocating responsibility for developing the NDS to a ministry, body or function dedicated to digital affairs or to an aboveministerial body or function. While a majority of countries have adopted a multi-stakeholder approach to developing and implementing their NDS, other essential success factors, notably dedicated funding for implementation, still have substantial room for improvement in many countries. The insights from the assessment of national digital strategies and their governance in this report can help policymakers as they develop new or revise existing national digital strategies and governance arrangements. Looking ahead, it may be beneficial for future work to also consider assessing countries’ broader digital policy landscape.

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 184 of 192

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

UNDP Digital Strategy 2022-2025

• •

(Organizational Digital Strategy) • • •

Social vs. digital Enable and amplify digital across programming to support development outcomes Inclusive and resilient digital ecosystems Digital workforce Digital upgrading

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 185 of 192

CAREC and the CAREC Digital Strategy Asian 2030 Development Accelerating Digital Bank Transformation for (February 2022)

Regional Competitiveness and Inclusive Growth

• • • •

• • • • • •

• •

Accessibility Objectives Broadband • Encourage investmen in the digital infrastructure across infrastructure the rregion to close connectivity gaps Connection gaps • Harmonize digital and data legislature to promote an Harmonize legislature enabling environment – digital policy • Develop new digital skills, including for women, enablers disadvantaged, and minority populations, to create Digital skills jobs Digital innovation • Attract talent into the region to strengthen CAREC’s Entrepreneurship innovation ecosystem ICT • Reduce regional trade barriers to increase cross-border Talent attraction to trade and expand business opportunities for companies the region across the region, particulary e-commerce Reduction in trade • Improve the digital foundations (represented through barriers the pillars in Section 5 -below) and create interoperable competitiveness digital platforms to enable the development of CAREC’s E-commerce opertional clusters Digital platforms

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 186 of 192

European Union E.U.’s 2030 Digital Decade (E.U.)

• • • •

Targets and objectives Digital skills Digital infrastructure The Digital Decade policy programme sets out digital ambitions for Digital transformation the next decade in the form of clear, concrete targets. The main goals can be summarised in four points: of businesses Digitalisation of public • A digitally skilled population and highly skilled digital services professionals • Secure and sustainable digital infrastructures • Digital transformation of businesses • Digitalisation of public services

Policy programme: measuring progress. The Digital Decade policy programme 2030 sets up a monitoring and cooperation mechanism to achieve the common objectives and targets for Europe’s digital transformation. As a first step under the policy programme, the commission will define the KPIs, such as, key progress indicators, in an implementing act. The KPIs will be based on the existing DESI exercise that measures the state of the digital transformation in Europe each year. Then the commission, in cooperation with the member states will work together to develop E.U.-level trajectories to assess

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 187 of 192

whether the progress observed for each target is sufficient to reach the 2030 values. Each year the commission will publish the State of the Digital Decade report in which it will measure and assess the progress towards the E.U. level trajectories and the ultimate Digital Decade targets and recommend further actions and efforts, where needed. The first State of the Digital Decade report will be published in 2023. Each member state will define its own national trajectories that are necessary to reach the common E.U. trajectories and targets. The national trajectories will be defined in the first national roadmaps that the member state will submit to the Commission. The member state will review and revise their national roadmaps every two years to inform about the planned actions, measures and investments they will undertake to achieve the objectives and targets.

Digital rights and principles. The declaration on digital rights and principles was signed at the highest level by the European Commission, the parliament and the council. The declaration covers key rights and principles for the digital transformation. It is shaped around six chapters: • • • • • •

Putting people and their rights at the centre of the digital transformation Supporting solidarity and inclusion Ensuring the freedom of choice online Fostering participation in the digital public space Increasing safety, security and empowerment of individuals Promoting the sustainability of the digital future

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 188 of 192

News article on international digital strategies (NEW!) Country

Topic

Themes

Description

Article website

2023 1.

China

Accelerating Rural Digital Transformation: China’s Priorities for 2023

• • • • • •

Digital villages Digital infrastructure Technology and farming Food security Broadband access Poverty alleviation through digital technology

The goal is to empower rural industries and rural areas through digitalization, driving the modernization of agriculture and rural areas, promoting common prosperity for rural farmers, and achieving new progress in building a strong agricultural country and a digitally advanced China. The “work points” outline the work goals to be achieved by the end of 2023. These include making staged progress in the development of digital villages, providing stronger support for national food security and consolidating the achievements of poverty alleviation through digital technology. The targets also include exceeding 190 million rural broadband access users, achieving basic coverage of 5G networks in areas above the township level and qualified administrative villages, reaching a 26.5 per cent informatization rate of agricultural production, and exceeding 580 billion yuan in retail sales of agricultural

https://opengovasia.com/accele rating-rural-digitaltransformation-chinas-prioritiesfor-2023/

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 189 of 192

products through e-commerce networks. 2.

China

Specific measures taken to promote digital villages (2023)

•

China releases report on development of digital villages

•

• • • •

Agricultural technology Digital village

Besides the heavy investment in agricultural technology, agriculture in the digital village is arguably an industry that is more than just applying new advances in technology — villagers’ lives are central pillars of rural vitalization and the digital village’s development.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/ a/202303/17/WS6413c521a310 57c47ebb502b.html

Digital infrastructure in villages Digital economy in villages Policy support Social services Smart agriculture

Improvements in digital village infrastructure
Progress in smart agriculture
Digital village new economy
Rural governance
Rural internet culture
Assisted social services
Digital green villages
Policy support for digital village development

https://www.dczchina.org/2023/03/16/chinareleases-report-ondevelopment-of-digital-villages/

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 190 of 192

An overview of broadband programs Jurisdiction

Article title

Theme(s)

Summary 2021

Programs in Canada Canada Universal Broadband Fund (UBF)

•

Canada

•

Connect To Innovate

• •

•

Broadband infrastructure Accessibility Indigenous connectivity

With the proposed Budget 2021, the now $2.75 billion Universal Broadband Fund will support high-speed Internet projects across the country. Budget 2021 proposes to provide an additional $1 billion over six years, starting in 2021-22, to the Universal Broadband Fund to support a more rapid rollout of broadband projects. The Universal Broadband Fund has been designed to fund broadband infrastructure projects that will bring high-speed Internet at 50/10 Megabits per second (Mbps) to rural and remote communities. In addition to funding a diversity of high-speed Internet projects to connect Canadians, there is: • Up to $50 million available to support mobile Internet projects that primarily benefit Indigenous peoples, including projects along highways and roads where mobile connectivity is lacking • Up to $750 million available for large impact projects • Up to $150 million available as part of our Rapid Response Stream The Universal Broadband Fund is part of the Government of Canada’s coordinated plan to connect all Canadians: High Speed Access for all: Canada’s Connectivity Strategy.

Broadband infrastructure Indigenous connectivity

In budget 2016 and 2019, the federal government had invested $585 million in broadband funding for back bone and last mile connectivity including microwave and satellite. In 2018, the auditor general marked ISED as unsuccessful in delivering this program because they did not maximize taxpayers’ dollars. Since this program was initiated in 2016, the maximum speeds this program supports are 5/1 Mbps and is considered outdated.

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 191 of 192

Canada

Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Rural and Northern Stream

•

CRTC Broadband Fund

•

• 4.

Canada

Telesat’s Lightspeed LEO satellite systems

• • •

Broadband infrastructure Inclusiveness

The federal government has developed a $2 billion funding program stream to improve broadband (mobile, cellular and wireline) connectivity for small, rural and remote communities.

Broadband infrastructure Indigenous connectivity Broadband infrastructure Broadband equality Indigenous connectivity

The CRTC Broadband Fund is investing $750M in expanding 50/10 Mbps broadband service or LTE or 5G coverage at premises, businesses and major road networks in Ontario.

Provincial government has allocated $4 billion for digital connectivity for household and businesses in Ontario. The RFP process involves reverse auction bidding and the endorsement of Supporting Broadband and Infrastructure Expansion Act, 2021 to accelerate the development of broadband projects. The provincial government has invested $1 billion in 50/10 Mbps fixed or mobile broadband, specifically last mile, backbone, cellular and satellite.

Ontario

Ontario Connects

•

Broadband infrastructure

Ontario

Improving Connectivity

•

Broadband infrastructure

• Rural Development Broadband ReConnect • • Loan and Grant Program. USDA. (n.d.).

Accessibility Affordability

in Ontario

The Federal government has invested $1.44 billion in Telesat’s Lightspeed Connectivity project that will bring high speed internet to remote areas in northern Canada. This project aims to target connectivity to those last five per cent who cannot get coverage.

International programs 6.

United States

•

Rural economic development •

The ReConnect Program offers loans, grants, and loan-grant combinations to facilitate broadband deployment in areas of rural America that currently do not have sufficient access to broadband. In facilitating the expansion of broadband services and infrastructure, the program will fuel long-term rural economic development and opportunities in rural America $350 million U.S, in grants for Tribal Governments and Socially Vulnerable communities

Digital Strategy Environmental Scan

Page 192 of 192

• • 7.

United States

Emergency Broadband Benefit. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.).

• • •

Accessibility Affordability Broadband for development

United Kingdom

U.K. Gigabit Broadband Voucher Scheme (n.d.).

• •

Accessibility Affordability

$200 million U.S. USD in loans

Or a combination of grants and loans

About the Emergency Broadband Benefit: • The Emergency Broadband Benefit is an FCC program to help families and households struggling to afford internet service during the COVID-19 pandemic. This new benefit will connect eligible households to jobs, critical healthcare services, virtual classrooms and so much more • The Emergency Broadband Benefit will provide a discount of up to $50 per month towards broadband service for eligible households and up to $75 per month for households on qualifying Tribal lands. Eligible households can also receive a one-time discount of up to $100 to purchase a laptop, desktop computer, or tablet from participating providers if they contribute more than $10 and less than $50 toward the purchase price • The Emergency Broadband Benefit is limited to one monthly service discount and one device discount per household • The U.K. Government is providing up to £210 million worth of voucher funding as immediate help for people experiencing slow broadband speeds in rural areas • Vouchers worth up to £1,500 for homes and £3,500 for businesses help to cover the costs of installing gigabit broadband to people’s doorsteps

Help support independent journalism

If NFNM’s reporting matters to you, Buy Me a Coffee is a simple way to help keep local watchdog coverage going.