Note: For the key indicators listed below, "rural" or "rural and small town" refers to areas outside census metropolitan areas or census agglomerations.
Cooperation between the United States, Australia and Canada arose out of a realisation that like-minded countries could work together to better recognise the contribution of nature and natural resources to our economic prosperity. On 15 December 2022, the United States and Australian governments announced a commitment to cooperate on Natural Capital Accounting (NCA), Environmental-Economic Accounting (EEA), and Related Statistics, outlining their intention to convene a Technical Working Group (TWG). Canada joined the U.S.-AUS TWG partnership in a technical capacity on the 9th of December 2023.
The purpose of the TWG is to facilitate shared learnings, leverage expertise, solve common challenges, and work towards a common approach to implementing natural capital accounts and environmental-economic statistics, guided by the UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (UN-SEEA) framework.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics hosted the first series which focused on Land Accounts, spanning over four sessions discussing the following topics:
Land use
Land cover
Valuation
Frontier topics like National Park valuation from a Canadian perspective.
These sessions were attended by Federal Government experts across the U.S., AUS and CAN working on Natural Capital Accounting/Environmental Economic Accounting and related statistics.
It was evident that there are some common approaches to methods for producing land accounts between the countries, like utilizing market transactions data for valuation and using Earth observations for modelling. Along with the common approaches, common challenges were also discussed. These included:
variabilities with earth observations and modelling techniques (e.g., satellite spectral variability, cloud cover and mixed pixel issues);
accurate classification and mapping of Agricultural land; and
How to separate out land and structure values, and valuing land resources such as forestry.
Outcomes
This first series of the TWG provided a platform for experts in Land Accounting in the United States, Canada and Australia the opportunity to:
share information/ dialogue (guided by the UN-SEEA framework),
solve common challenges and leverage expertise on land accounting, in aiming to achieve comparability of approaches, as appropriate; and
form relationships to continue the conversation on technical developments in this space.
This series facilitated an opportunity for a common approach to NCA, EEA and environmental-economic statistics and advanced opportunities for global leadership and agenda setting on NCA and nature-based solutions.
Next TWG Series
The next Technical Working Group Series will begin in May 2024, focusing on Water Accounting.
Participants of the Partnership on Cooperation on Natural Capital Accounting, Environmental-Economic Accounting, and Related Statistics, issued December 9th, 2023, include Australia, Canada and the United States. To advance international cooperation on aligning environmental and economic data into national environmental-economic statistics, the partnership is convening a Technical Working Group.
The Technical Working Group on Natural Capital Accounting, Environmental-Economic Accounting, and Related Statistics facilitates shared learnings, leverages expertise, solves common challenges, and works towards comparability of approaches on natural capital accounting and environmental-economic statistics.
The Technical Working Group is chaired by representatives of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Office of the Chief Statistician of the United States, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and Statistics Canada. Membership in this working group will be drawn from Federal government agencies that are developing or working on natural capital accounting, environmental-economic accounting or related statistics. The Technical Working Group is expected to convene every six months, virtually or in-person.
The intention is to facilitate a common approach to natural capital accounting, environmental-economic accounting, and environmental-economic statistics in ways that are guided by the UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (UN-SEEA) framework.
Communiqués related to the Working Group sessions are available here:
The Canadian Grain Commission establishes the class Wheat, Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS) and designates the varieties of wheat listed below to be in the CWRS class:
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Northern Hard Red (CNHR)
The varieties of wheat listed below are designated to be in the CNHR class:
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Prairie Spring Red (CPSR)
The Canadian Grain Commission establishes the class Wheat, Canada Prairie Spring Red (CPSR) and designates the varieties of wheat listed below to be in the CPSR class:
AAC Camrose
AAC Castle
AAC Crossfield
AAC Crusader
AAC Entice
AAC Foray
AAC Goodwin
AAC Penhold
AAC Perform
AAC Rimbey
AAC Ryley
AAC Tenacious
AAC Westlock
Accelerate
CDC Reign
CDC Terrain
Cutler
Enchant
Fierce
LAR18-03928
Recoil
SY Rorke
SY Rowyn
SY985
SY995
UA Forefront
5700PR
5701PR
5702PR
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Prairie Spring White (CPSW)
The varieties of wheat listed below are designated to be in the CPSW class:
AC Karma
AC Vista
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Western Extra Strong (CWES)
The varieties of wheat listed below are designated to be in the CWES class:
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Western Hard White Spring (CWHWS)
The varieties of wheat listed below are designated to be in the CWHWS class:
AAC Cirrus
AAC Iceberg
AAC Tomkins
AAC Whitefox
AAC Whitehead
CDC Whitewood
Kanata
Snowbird
Snowstar
Whitehawk
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Western Soft White Spring (CWSWS)
The varieties of wheat listed below are designated to be in the CWSWS class:
AAC Chiffon
AAC Galore
AAC Indus
AAC Paramount
AC Andrew
AC Meena
AC Nanda
AC Phil
AC Reed
Bhishaj
Sadash
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing August 1, 2024 or the signing date, and is in effect until July 31, 2025, unless revoked earlier.
Wheat, Canada Eastern Red Spring (CERS)
The Canadian Grain Commission establishes the class Wheat, Canada Eastern Red Spring (CERS) and designates the varieties of wheat listed below to be in the CERS class:
This order comes into effect on the later of the crop year commencing July 1, 2024, or the signing date, and is in effect until June 30, 2025, unless amended or revoked earlier.
We kindly request that you make every effort possible to provide consolidated information when reporting research and development expenditures, intellectual property produced, partnerships, and other relevant aggregates for your institution by including the values of legal entities under your control such as affiliated business schools and laboratories throughout this questionnaire. Consolidated reporting helps ensure accuracy and completeness of the estimates for the Higher Education Sector. Thank you for your cooperation.
Question 1. Please provide the number of all affiliated institutions that are separate legal entities from your institution.
Legal entity refers to various organizational forms recognized by law as capable of holding legal rights and obligations. Key types include Corporations, Partnerships, Sole Proprietorships, Trusts, and Non-profit Organizations.
Number of institutions
Question 2. Please provide the name of all affiliated institutions that are separate legal entities from your institution.
Legal name of the institution
Question 3. Please provide information of all affiliated institutions that are separate legal entities from your institution and indicate if their responses are consolidated with your institution in this questionnaire.
Name of institution:
Federal Business number (9 digits):
Type of institution:
Select:
University
College
Hospital
Engineering School
Management or Commerce School
Other School or Faculty
Technology Access Centre
Centre Collégial de Transfert Technologies
Technology Transfer Office
Other Laboratory or research Centres
Other
Accounted for in the estimates (Yes or No):
Select:
Yes
No
R&D Performed
Reference Period for the Survey
Unless otherwise specified the reference period for this survey refers to the federal government fiscal year cycle which is from April 1 to March 31.
Definition of Research and Development Expenditures for the Survey
For this survey, R&D expenditures include both sponsored and non-sponsored research activities.
R&D expenditures also include the following items:
capital R&D expenditures
R&D expenditures in the social sciences and humanities
payments for R&D performed by other organizations outside Canada.
“In-house R&D” refers to expenditures within Canada for R&D performed within this institution by:
employees (permanent, temporary or casual)
self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this business’s R&D projects.
“Outsourced R&D” refers to payments made within or outside Canada to other businesses, organizations or individuals to fund R&D performance:
grants
fellowships
contracts.
Question 4. Please provide this institution’s total expenditures in R&D performed in-house within Canada in the last 3 years.
Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.
Total in-house R&D expenditures in Canada ($ ‘000):
Fiscal year ended in March 2022
Fiscal year ended in March 2023
Fiscal year ended in March 2024
Question 5. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what were the sources of funds for this institution’s total expenditures for R&D performed in-house?
Include Canadian and foreign sources.
Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.
Report “0” for no R&D expenditures.
From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what were the sources of funds for this institution’s total expenditures for R&D performed in-house?
From within Canada
From outside Canada
a. Federal government grants or funding
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
b. Federal government contracts
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
c. Provincial or territorial government grants or funding and contracts
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
d. Municipal government grants or funding and contracts
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
e. Indigenous government grants or funding and contracts
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
f Institution’s own funds spent on R&D
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
g. Private sector funding, including any partner contribution on grants
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
h. Non-profit sector funding
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
i. Value of in-kind contributions received for research from private sector
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
j. Value of in-kind contributions received for research from non-profit sector
$ ‘000
$ ‘000
Question 6. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, how were this institution’s total expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada distributed by field(s) of research and development?
Exclude:
payments for outsourced (contracted out or granted) R&D.
capital depreciation
Report “0” for no R&D expenditures.
Field(s) of research and development
Amount
a. Natural and formal sciences Exclude computer sciences, information technology and bioinformatics (to be reported at lines c. and d.). e.g., Mathematics, physical sciences, chemical sciences, earth and related environmental sciences, biological sciences, and other natural sciences
$ ‘000
b. Engineering and technology Exclude software engineering and technology (to be reported at line c). e.g., Civil engineering, electrical engineering, electronic engineering and communications technology, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, materials engineering, medical engineering, environmental engineering, environmental biotechnology, industrial biotechnology, nanotechnology, and other engineering and technologies
$ ‘000
c. Software-related sciences and technology e.g., Software engineering and technology, computer sciences, information technology and bioinformatics
$ ‘000
d. Medical and health sciences e.g., Basic medicine, clinical medicine, health sciences, medical biotechnology, and other medical sciences
$ ‘000
e. Agricultural sciences e.g., Agriculture, forestry and fisheries sciences, animal and dairy sciences, veterinary sciences, agricultural biotechnology, and other agricultural sciences
$ ‘000
f. Social sciences and humanities e.g., Psychology, educational sciences, economics and business, and other social sciences and humanities
$ ‘000
2024 - Total in-house R&D expenditures within Canada by field of research and development (Sum of a. to f. should equal total in-house R&D expenditures from question 4)
$ ‘000
Question 7. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, did your institution perform R&D related to the following emerging technologies?
Note: Press the help button (?) for additional definitions or explanations.
Integrated Internet of Things (IoT) Systems
Yes
No
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Yes
No
Geomatics or geospatial technologies
Yes
No
Virtual, mixed and augmented reality technologies
Yes
No
Biotechnology: biomanufacturing
Yes
No
Biotechnology: genomics
Yes
No
Other biotechnologies
Yes
No
Blockchain or distributed ledger technologies (BDL)
Yes
No
Nanotechnology
Yes
No
Quantum computing
Yes
No
Other emerging technology, please specify
Question 8. Does your institution possess a centralized research office such as an Applied Research Office or equivalent, a Technology Access Centre, a Centre Collégial de Transfert de Technologies, a Technology Transfer Office or a Research Park?
Type of office or centre:
Applied Research Office or equivalent
Yes
No
Technology Access Centre
Yes
No
Centre Collégial de Transfert de Technologies
Yes
No
Technology Transfer Office
Yes
No
Research Park
Yes
No
Intellectual Property Outputs: Prototypes and processes
Question 9. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, how many new prototypes or new processes were developed at your institution?
Prototypes are defined as an original model constructed to include all the technical and performance characteristics of the new product.
Processes are defined as transformation of inputs to outputs and their delivery or to organizational structures or practices.
Count
New prototypes
New processes
Intellectual Property Disclosures and Applications
Question 10. Has the institution engaged in any of the following forms of Intellectual Property (IP) protection activities from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Select all that apply.
Filing of patent applications
Registration of copyright for computer software or databases
Registration of copyright for literary, artistic, dramatic or musical works, books, papers
Registration of copyright for educational materials
Registration of industrial designs
Filing for protection of trademarks or official marks
Registration of integrated circuit topographies
Filing of applications for plant breeders’ rights
Execution of non-disclosure or confidentiality agreements
Administration of material transfer agreements (MTAs) inbound
Administration of material transfer agreements (MTAs) outbound
Other
Please specify:
Question 11. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, if applicable, how many Intellectual Property (IP) disclosures have been made at the institution? How many have led to formal protection activity? And how many have not resulted in any protection activity?
Please indicate “0” if there is no amount to report.
From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, if applicable, how many Intellectual Property (IP) disclosures have been made at the institution? How many have led to formal protection activity? And how many have not resulted in any protection activity?
Number of disclosures
Number of disclosures resulted in protection activity
Number of disclosures did not result in protection activity
a. Inventions
b. Computer software or databases
c. Educational materials
d. Other materials
e. Industrial designs
f. Trademarks or official marks
g. Integrated circuit topographies
h. New plant varieties
i. Other
Question 12. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, how many initiating or follow-on patent applications were filed with the support of the institution?
Initiating patent applications include Provisionals or first filings. Follow-on patent applications include any that claim priority from an initiating patent application (e.g., CIPs). Regarding international patent applications (e.g., Patent Cooperation Treaty, PCT), count the parent PCT as one application and each entry into national phase as one application.
Please indicate “0” if there are no patents to report for this year.
From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, how many initiating or follow-on patent applications were filed with the support of the institution?
Total
Initiating
Follow-on
Total patent applications
Question 13. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, of the patents filed with the support of the institution, indicate how many were issued, whether or not the institution retained the rights.
Please indicate “0” if there are no patents to report for this year.
Total patents issued from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Question 14. At the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what was the total number of active patents held by the institution, including patents issued this year and how many were licensed, assigned or otherwise commercialized?
At the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what was the total number of active patents held by the institution, including patents issued this year and how many were licensed, assigned or otherwise commercialized?
Total
a. Patents held at the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
b. Patents licensed, assigned or otherwise commercialized at the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Research Partnerships and Collaborations
Question 15. Please provide the following information about partnerships at your institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Please report partnerships in only one category that best represents them.
Partnership with a sponsored research component should always be reported in research and development agreements, even if they have a co-op or technical service component.
Please provide the total count of individuals, regardless of their employment status or hours worked.
Please provide the following information about partnerships at your institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Please report partnerships in only one category that best represents them.
Type of partnerships
Number of partnerships
Number of students involved
a. Research and development agreements
b. Service-for-fee or technical service agreements
c. Partnerships focused-on student training, internship, co-op or professional development
d. Other partnerships
Total
Question 16. Please provide the following information about partnerships involving at least one industry partner at your institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Please report partnerships in only one category that best represents them.
Partnership with a sponsored research component should always be reported in research and development agreements, even if they have a co-op or technical service component.
Please provide the total count of individuals, regardless of their employment status or hours worked.
Please provide the following information about partnerships involving at least one industry partner at your institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Partnerships involving at least one industry partner
Number of partnerships
Number of students involved
Amount of funding from industry
a. Research and development agreements
$ ‘000
b. Service-for-fee or technical service agreements
$ ‘000
c. Partnerships focused-on student training, internship, co-op or professional development
$ ‘000
d. Other partnerships
$ ‘000
Total
Question 17. Please provide the following information on the research and development contracts in effect from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
For the country of control, please answer to the best of your knowledge on the basis of the country of residence of the ultimate parent entity. In the case the business is the Canadian subsidiary of a foreign Multinational (e.g., Inc. Canada, Inc. United States), the sponsor should be designated as Foreign controlled enterprises and Multinationals.
A repeat partner is a partner that was also a partner in one of the previous 5 years.
For co-sponsored contracts, count the contract once for each of the type of sponsor in the column “Number of Contracts” and allocate the value according to each of the contribution in the “Total Value of Contracts” column.
Please provide the following information on the research and development contracts in effect from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Sponsor
Number of Contracts
Number of distinct partners
Number of distinct repeat partners
Total value of contracts
Federal government
$ ‘000
Provincial or territorial government
$ ‘000
Municipal government
$ ‘000
Indigenous government
$ ‘000
Foreign governments
$ ‘000
Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with less than 500 employees
$ ‘000
Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with 500 or more employees
$ ‘000
Foreign-controlled enterprises and foreign multinationals
$ ‘000
Other Canadian organizations (e.g., not-for-profit organizations)
$ ‘000
Other Foreign organizations
$ ‘000
Other
$ ‘000
Total
$ ‘000
Question 18. Please indicate what portions of the total value of the research and development contracts in effect from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024 were allocated to clinical trials and collaborative R&D.
For multi-year contracts, please prorate the total amount of the contracts from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Please indicate what portions of the total value of the research and development contracts in effect from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024 were allocated to clinical trials and collaborative R&D.
Type of research contract
Number of contracts
Total value of contracts
Clinical Trials
The institution only tested drugs or other intellectual property on behalf of another party (e.g., a pharmaceutical company) and therefore, the institution does not own the drug patent(s) or other intellectual property in question.
$ ‘000
Collaborative R&D
The research sponsor and the institution collaborated in the performance of the research.
$ ‘000
Question 19. Please provide the approximate value of your institution’s research equipment infrastructure, excluding the value of real estate, and the percentage of it that has been used for the benefit of at least one industry partner throughout April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Research equipment infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, laboratory equipment, instruments and machinery used for R&D, databases, biobanks and large-scale computational tools.
“Used for the benefit of an industry partner” includes direct use by the partner as well as indirect used through research conducted for the benefit of or in collaboration with the industry partner.
Value of the institution’s research equipment infrastructure ($ ‘000)
Percentage of the research equipment infrastructure that has been used for the benefit of at least one industry partner throughout April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Intellectual Property Management
Question 20. Does this institution engage in Intellectual Property (IP) management, including identification, protection, promotion or commercialization?
If there is no Intellectual Property (IP) management at the institution, please provide an explanation.
Yes, this institution engages in IP management
No, IP is managed through an affiliated university
No, IP is managed through an external IP valuation office
No, the institution does not produce IP
No, other
Please specify:
Question 21. Please provide the number of all affiliated institutions and research centres for which the Intellectual Property (IP) is managed by your institution.
Number of all affiliated institutions and research centres
Question 22. Please provide the name of all affiliated institutions and research centres for which the IP is managed by your institution.
Name of affiliated institutions and research centres
Question 23. Please indicate the type of institutions and research centres for which the IP is managed by your institution.
Name of Institution
Indicate the type of institution
University
College
Hospital
Engineering School
Management or Commerce School
Other School or Faculty
Technology Access Centre
Centre Collégial de Transfert Technologies
Technology Transfer Office
Other Laboratory or research Centres
Other
Question 24. Does your institution have one or more central offices engaged in Intellectual Property (IP) management, including identification, protection or commercialization?
Yes
No
Question 25. Please provide the number of all offices within the institution that are engaged, wholly or in part, in intellectual property (IP) management.
Number of all offices
Question 26. Please provide the name of all offices within the institution that are engaged, wholly or in part, in IP.
Name of the office
Question 27. Please provide the information of all offices within the institution that are engaged, wholly or in part, in intellectual property (IP) management.
For each office, indicate the resources dedicated to intellectual property management. Expenditures should be estimated to correspond to the portion of the office dedicated to intellectual property management. Patent and regular legal expenditures include those for patent filings, patent searches, registration of copyright, etc. Litigation expenditures are those related to disputes over patents and other intellectual property and include settlements. Full-time equivalent (FTE) employment is the number of FTE jobs defined as total hours worked divided by average annual hours worked in full-time jobs. This can also be described as full-time-equivalent work-years. If you have three persons working a quarter of their time on this activity, the FTE is equal to 0.25+0.25+0.25 = 0.75 FTE.
Other operation expenditures include direct fee payments to intellectual property offices, expenses to comply with government regulations, fees for licensing and online platforms, fees on workshops for IP management practices, fees for valuation services on IP.
Name of the Office
Number of FTEs managing IP
Amounts ($ ‘000)
Salaries and benefits for FTEs maintaining IP
Legal services expenses for IP management (excluding salaries, wages, and enforcement)
IP enforcement related expenditures
Other operational expenditures
Question 28. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what percentage of your institution’s total operational expenditures for intellectual property management were from each of the following sources?
Percentage by Source:
Institutional base funding
Institutional one-time allocation
Intellectual property commercialization revenues
e.g., licensing, cashed-in equity
External sources
Total
Question 29. Please provide the number of employees who were involved in technology transfer at the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024.
Number of employees
Question 30. For each employee who was involved in technology transfer at the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, please list the highest university degree obtained and the number of years of technology transfer experience.
Employee
Highest university degree obtained
No Post-Secondary Education
Post-Secondary Education below Bachelor
Bachelors
Masters
Doctorate
Other
Years of technology transfer experience
Question 31. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, which of the following types of resources did the situation use for information, guidance or advice on intellectual property matters?
Select all that apply.
Canadian Intellectual Property Office
Other Canadian government offices
e.g., federal, provincial, municipal
Foreign Intellectual Property Offices
e.g., United States Patent and Trademark Office, World Intellectual Property Organization
Trade commissioner services
Business incubators or accelerators
Intellectual Property clinics
In-house legal counsel or legal departments
Exclude external law firms or lawyers
External law firms or lawyers
Exclude in-house legal counsel or legal departments
Intellectual property strategists
In-house Patent or trademark agents
External Patent or trademark agents
Industry associations, chambers of commerce or business partner networks
Other sources
e.g., friends, peers, mentors, words of mouth, other online sources
Question 32. What is your ownership policy for IP produced at your institution related to the following?
Please provide the typical distribution across stakeholders.
What is your ownership policy for IP produced at your institution related to the following?
Institution
Faculty or Department
Inventors or creators
Other
Total
Inventions and Patents
Computer software ordatabases and Copyright
Educational materials and Copyright
Other materialsand Copyright
Industrial designsand design patents
Trademarks or official marks
Integrated circuit topographies
New plant varietiesand Plant breeders' rights
Other
Intellectual Property Commercialization
Question 33. How many new licenses and options were granted to the following actors from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
For the country of control, please answer to the best of your knowledge on the basis of the country of residence of the ultimate parent entity. In the case the business is the Canadian subsidiary of a foreign multinational enterprise (e.g., Inc Canada, Inc United-States), the recipient should be designated as foreign controlled enterprise and foreign multinationals.
How many new licenses and options were granted to the following actors from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Recipients
Licenses
Options
a. Federal government
b. Provincial or territorial government
c. Municipal government
d. Indigenous government
e. Foreign governments
f. Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with less than 500 employees
g. Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with 500 or more employees
h. Foreign-controlled enterprises and foreign multinationals
i. Other Canadian organizations
e.g., not for profit organizations
j. Other foreign organizations
Question 34. How many total licenses and options did your institution execute from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Total licenses executed by the institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Total options executed by the institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Total number of open-source licenses made available by the institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Question 35. From April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, what was the total amount of income received from intellectual property?
Income received from IP ($ ‘000):
Income received from running royalties
Income received from milestone payments
Income received from one-time sales of IP (in exchange for a single or several payments)
Income received from reimbursement of patent, legal and related costs
License income received from another Canadian institution under a revenue-sharing agreement
Other
Question 36. How many licenses yielded more than $1 million from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Number of licenses that yielded more than $1,000,000 from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
Question 37. What was the value of direct sales of IP by your institution to these recipients from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024?
Direct sales are sales of IP that involve transfer in ownership.
For the country of control, please answer to the best of your knowledge on the basis of the country of residence of the ultimate parent entity. In the case the business is the Canadian subsidiary of a foreign multinational enterprise (e.g., Inc Canada, Inc. United-States), the recipient should be designated as Foreign controlled enterprise and foreign multinationals.
Total by Recipient ($ ‘000):
Federal government
Provincial or territorial government
Municipal government
Indigenous government
Foreign governments
Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with less than 500 employees
Canadian-controlled enterprises and Canadian multinationals with 500 or more employees
Foreign-controlled enterprises and foreign multinationals
Other Canadian organizations
e.g., not for profit organizations
Other foreign organizations
Question 38. How does your institution make your technologies and inventions known to the public?
Select all that apply.
Publication of patent documents filed through an IP office (such as CIPO)
Publication in academic research journals
Conference or webinar participation by researchers
Training and lessons targeting professionals in the private sector
ExploreIP, or other similar IP marketing platforms
Showcasing and pitching events
The institution’s own website or the website of an association the institution is a member of
Social media presence or posting
Popular science magazines
Traditional or mainstream media
Other
Please specify:
Start-ups, Spin-offs and Support to SMEs
Question 39. For the period between April 1, 2023 and March 31, 2024, please provide how many SMEs received support from your institution as well as the method of support provided.
Include support provided by the institution itself or in collaboration with a partner organization.
SMEs are defined as enterprises with less than 500 employees.
Total number SMEs of that received support
Number of SMEs that received provision of co-work or office space support
Number of SMEs that received laboratory space or maker space or access to equipment support
Number of SMEs that received administrative support
Number of SMEs that received business coaching or consultation or mentoring or leadership development support
Number of SMEs that received trade and export support (includes business development missions, internationalization, and any other activities linked to international market development)
Number of SMEs that received networking events and key introductions support
Number of SMEs that received provision of funding support
Number of SMEs that received regulatory assistance support
Number of SMEs that received intellectual property education and assistance support (includes patent, trademark and copyright evaluation, intellectual property strategy, protection, and licensing)
Number of SMEs that received practical prototype or Minimum Viable Product (MVP) development assistance support
Number of SMEs that received other support
Question 40. Please provide the number of start-ups and spin-off companies that have emerged from your institution's research during the last 5 years.
New companies may be established to license the institution's technology, fund research at the institution to develop technology that will be licensed by the company or provide a service that was originally offered through a department or unit of the institution. These companies are often called spin-offs. The first type, those dependent on licensing the institution’s IP, are called start-ups.
Number of start-ups and spin-off companies
Question 41. Please provide the legal name of start-ups and spin-off companies that have emerged from your institution's research during the last 5 years.
Legal name of start-up or spin-off company
Question 42. Please provide the following information for start-ups and spin-off companies, which the institution is aware of, that were created during the last 5 years to commercially exploit technology developed through the R&D performed at the institution.
Legal Name
Federal Business number (9 digits)
% of Company owned by the institution
Question 43. Can you please provide the following information on the institution’s investments in start-ups and spin-offs that were created to commercially exploit technology developed through the R&D performed at the institution?
Can you please provide the following information on the institution’s investments in start-ups and spin-offs that were created to commercially exploit technology developed through the R&D performed at the institution?
Amount
a. How much investment in start-ups and spin-offs (e.g., venture capital, angel investment) was raised with the assistance of the institution from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
$ ‘000
b. The amount received from disposition of equity holdings, options and warrants in start-ups and spin-off companies from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
$ ‘000
c. The total value of cash dividends received from these start-ups and spin-off companies (not including disposition of equity) from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
$ ‘000
d. The value of remaining equity held by the institution in publicly traded start-ups and spin-off companies at the end of the reference period, from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024
$ ‘000
Obstacles to Intellectual Property Commercialization
Question 44. What are the obstacles that your institution face during the process of IP commercialization?
Select all that apply to your institution.
Lack of funding
Lack of expertise
Uncertainty and risk
Not an institutional priority
Other
Please Specify:
Question 45. What is the most important obstacle that your institution faces during the process of IP commercialization?
Lack of funding
Lack of expertise
Uncertainty and risk
Not an institutional priority
Other
Question 46. Provide the number of all the government programs that were leveraged, by level of government, to overcome obstacles to intellectual property commercialization.
Number of government program:
Question 47. Provide the number of all the government programs that were leveraged, by level of government, to overcome obstacles to intellectual property commercialization.
Name of government program:
Question 48. Provide the names of all the government programs that were leveraged, by level of government, to overcome obstacles to intellectual property commercialization and indicate to what extent they were effective in overcoming these obstacles.
Name
Level of government
Federal
Provincial or territorial
Municipal
Indigenous
Obstacle
Lack of Funding
Lack of Expertise
Uncertainty / Risk
Not an institutional priority
Other
Effectiveness
Not Effective
Moderately Effective
Very Effective
Unable to Assess at the Moment
Question 49. If you have comments or feedback regarding the survey or want to clarify your responses to one or more questions, please do so below:
The Crime Severity Index, or CSI, was developed in 2009 as a new analytical measure to complement the crime rate and address its limitations. The CSI is an area-based measure that considers both the volume and the relative severity of crimes, then tracks changes over time.
Description - Infosheet: Understanding and using the Crime Severity Index
Understanding and using the Crime Severity Index
The Crime Severity Index (CSI) was developed in 2009 as a complementary measure to the conventional crime rate and self-reported victimization data. It represented the first major change in how Statistics Canada looks at police-reported crime information in nearly 50 years.
Why do we use the CSI?
The CSI is a standardized and consistent measure of crime and a key indicator.
The CSI is one important way of looking at crime. It can help users see the situation more fully when combined with other sources of information, such as police-reported crime counts and data on courts and corrections, police resourcing, self-reported victimization, and perceptions of safety and trust in institutions.
The CSI is one piece of a much larger puzzle that helps Canadians better understand the country—its population, resources, economy, environment, society and culture.
Gaining a holistic understanding of an area requires more information than any single indicator, like the CSI, can provide. That is why the CSI is one of many indicators used in the Canadian Indicator Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and the Quality of Life Framework for Canada.
Additionally, the CSI is an area-based index. It does not consider the specific demographic characteristics of each area or how different groups of people may experience harm and discrimination. Other sources of information include detailed census profiles or analytical articles available through the Crime and Justice Statistics Portal on the Statistics Canada website (www.statcan.gc.ca). This information can help provide more context.
Measuring police-reported crime with the CSI
The conventional crime rate measures the total number of crimes reported by police in an area relative to its population. Each crime has the same impact on the crime rate: for example, one murder has the same effect as one theft. More frequent crimes that are also less serious usually affect the crime rate the most.
While this is a useful measure of crime volume over time, it is less effective at reflecting changes in less frequent crimes, even if they are more serious.
The CSI looks at both the number and the relative seriousness of crimes. To calculate the CSI, each type of crime is assigned a weight that represents its relative severity. Then, the number of police-reported incidents for a given type of crime is multiplied by the crime's weight. Assigned weights area based on standardized information from court sentencing data over the previous five years.
Crimes that are more likely to result in prison time and longer sentences are given a higher weight. Crimes with a higher weight will have a larger impact on the CSI than crimes with a lower weight. Three related indexes—the overall CSI, the Violent CSI and the Non-violent CSI—look at different groupings of crime. A CSI is also calculated for youth accused of crime.
Conventional crime rate
1 property theft has the same impact as 1 murder.
One incident of murder is equivalent in weight to one incident of property theft.
Crime Severity Index
1 murder has about 280 times the impact of 1 property theft.
Murder has a weight of over 8,200, while property theft has a weight of 29.Footnote 2
The police-reported Crime Severity Index (CSI) is a summary measure of the volume and severity of police-reported crime in an area—a city, a province or territory, or the country.
However, the CSI is not intended to be used in isolation and is not a universal indicator of community safety. This paper highlights the origins of the CSI and the importance of interpreting the Index in conjunction with other data sources to better understand crime in a given area.
More detailed methodology and reference publications are also highlighted at the end of this paper.
The origins of the Crime Severity Index
Since the 1960s, police-reported crime from the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR)Footnote 1 has been understood through the conventional crime rate.
The Crime Severity Index (CSI) was developed in 2009 as a complementary measure to the conventional crime rate and self-reported victimization data.Footnote 2 It represented the first major change in how Statistics Canada looked at police-reported information in nearly 50 years.
The CSI is intended to be one of many sources of information that can be used to better understand the evolving nature of crime in Canada.
Combining information from different sources provides a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues. For example, there are many ways of looking at crime, including with police-reported crime counts, courts and corrections data, police resourcing data, as well as survey data on self-reported victimization and perceptions of safety and trust in institutions.
Each source offers a particular way to understand crime, and in combination with other indicators and information sources, society.
Measuring police-reported crime with the Crime Severity IndexFootnote 3
The conventional crime rate is calculated by adding up the number of crimes reported by police for a given period and geographical area and then dividing that total by the population count for the area. Therefore, each crime has the same impact on the crime rate—for example, one murder has the same impact as one theft.
Typically, more frequent but less serious crimes have the largest impact on the crime rate.
While this is a useful measure of the volume of crime coming to the attention of police over time, and therefore adding to our understanding of police workloads and demands on the justice system, it is not as effective at reflecting changes in less frequent but more serious crimes.
The CSI was developed to address the limitations of the conventional crime rate by looking at both the number and relative seriousness of crimes to create an index, and then tracks these changes over time.
In fact, there are three related indexes—the overall CSI, the Violent CSI and the Non-violent CSI—that look at different types of crime. A CSI is also calculated for youth accused of crime.
Measuring—or weighing—crime severity
To calculate the CSI, each type of crime is assigned a weight that represents its relative severity. Then, the number of police-reported incidents for a given type of crime is multiplied by the crime's weight. Assigned weights are based on standardized information from court sentencing data over the previous five years.Footnote 4
Crimes that are more likely to result in prison time and longer sentences are given a higher weight.
For example: Using the conventional crime rate, one property theft has the same impact on the crime rate as one murder. One incident of murder is therefore equivalent in weight to one incident of property theft.
However, in the Crime Severity Index, murder has a weight of over 8,200, while property theft has a weight of 29.Footnote 5 As such, the impact of one murder on the CSI is approximately 280 times greater than one property theft.
First-degree murder has a far heavier weight in the CSI than property theft, highlighting its severity, even though it happens far less frequently. So, relative to the conventional crime rate, the CSI will better reflect the impact of a change in the frequency of first-degree murder, whereas with the conventional crime rate, this change may go undetected.
Another way of looking at this is that the CSI is one way to more accurately reflect changes in instances of more serious but less frequent crimes in an area, while changes in less serious crimes will have less impact on the CSI than they do on the crime rate. This provides a more comprehensive and nuanced picture of crime, especially when combined with other measures of crime.
The CSI also allows for the comparison of changes in crime over time and across Canada when controlling for the unique circumstances of each area, such as how many people live in the area, the age and gender mix, employment opportunities and wages, level of remoteness and availability of services among others.
We can then interpret changes in the CSI within the context of other indicators.
Like any individual social, economic, or environmental indicator, other complementary sources of information, both within and outside the criminal justice system must also be considered Footnote 6 to draw a full picture of crime and safety in an area.
The Crime Severity Index was developed in conjunction with stakeholders and the public and is used to measure sustainable development goals
The CSI is a standardized and consistent measure of crime and a key indicator for the country. It uses standardized data from the UCR Survey, a census of all police-reported crime in Canada.
Extensive consultation and development work ensures the CSI is methodologically sound, easily understandable, and robust with respect to changes in crime.
The CSI is also an indicator in the Canadian Indicator Framework for reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals,Footnote 7 an international initiative to achieve a more sustainable and equitable future. It is also a key indicator in the Quality of Life Framework for Canada,Footnote 8 which brings together data on the well-being of Canadians.
As such, the CSI is one piece of a much larger puzzle that helps Canadians better understand the country—its population, resources, economy, environment, society and culture.
Key considerations when using the Crime Severity Index
At its core, the CSI is a measure of crime reported by police in a specific region. It accounts for the weighted severity of each reported crime, relative to the census population count in the area, expressed per 100,000 people.
Changes in population
Population counts used to calculate the CSI are derived from the once every five years Census of Population.Footnote 9 However, populations can be dynamic, especially in regions where the economy is largely driven by a seasonal activity such as tourism, or through certain business activity or border crossings.Footnote 10
Certain regions may also experience higher population movement or mobility due to several factors, such as the local job market, housing costs, location (city, town, remote area) and the presence or absence of community services in those areas.
These population characteristics must also be considered when interpreting crime trends.
Unreported crimes not covered by the CSI
The underlying data from the UCR Survey are a census of all crime coming to the attention of police in Canada.
The data go through rigorous quality assurance checks and are based on a standardized reporting manual for national crime statistics.Footnote 11
However, these data do not capture crimes that are not reported to police.
CSI updated regularly to reflect changes in legislation and sentencing
Data from the UCR Survey may also be impacted by more area-specific changes in police practices, police resources,Footnote 12 public awareness campaigns,Footnote 13 policing initiatives for tackling specific types of crime,Footnote 14 and the relationship between the public and the police.
The CSI weights are regularly updated to reflect changes in legislation and sentencing in Canadian courts.Footnote 15
Weights used to calculate the CSI are adjusted every five years, and the underlying methodology for counting crime is reviewed to ensure changes in legislation, crime reporting and court practices are considered.Footnote 16
Looking at the CSI through a diversity-focused lens
As an area-based measure, the CSI does not consider specific demographic characteristics of each area or how different groups of people in an area may experience harm and discrimination.
For example, First Nations people, Métis and Inuit are historically overrepresented among victims of homicide,Footnote 17 self-reported victims of violence,Footnote 18 and in the criminal justice system.Footnote 19Footnote 20 Colonialism, territorial dispossession, socioeconomic marginalization and systemic discrimination were identified as significant contributing factors to the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system.Footnote 21
Sentencing provision for Indigenous people
The Canadian government, legislature and judiciary have sought to address the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the Canadian justice system over time.Footnote 22 Specifically, paragraph 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code, introduced in 1996, sets out that before a court imposes a sentence, "all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders."
This sentencing provision was first interpreted in the case of R v Gladue ("Gladue") in 1999. The Supreme Court decision in Gladue set out principles requiring that courts take the unique circumstances of Indigenous offenders into account in sentencing. The decision laid out a framework to help guide judges in sentencing Indigenous offenders. This led to the recommended use of "Gladue reports," which provide background information on an offender to assist in appropriate sentencing.
Various critiques and concerns about the application of Gladue were subsequently raised. In 2012, the Supreme Court in R v Ipeelee reaffirmed its commitment to the principles enunciated in Gladue, addressed a number of critiques and clarified concerns. The Supreme Court also recognized that the criminal justice system bore some of the responsibility for the offences discussed in the case.Footnote 23
Indigenous people also report lower levels of confidence in policeFootnote 24 and are more likely to report experiencing discrimination when dealing with the police than their non-Indigenous counterparts.Footnote 25
Calls to address systemic racism in policing and the relationship between police and Indigenous peoples have also been raised.Footnote 26
However, area-based measures of crime can potentially gloss over complex systemic issues in an area or between different groups of people, or they may reflect these underlying issues.
For example, the CSI does not account for particular socioeconomic context of an area or the the presence or absence of community services that may influence police responses in a given area.
It is therefore vital to consider additional context to better understand the lived experience of people in the area.
The foreword of Canada's Anti-Racism StrategyFootnote 27 acknowledges that the experiences of racism and discrimination among racialized communities and Indigenous peoples may vary. "Applying an intersectional lens reveals a complex picture of the way that different groups and individuals are excluded and harmed."
The strategy also states that "data and evidence are indispensable tools for identifying and addressing inequities, and enabling corrective action toward the elimination of racism and discrimination."
A major step in responding to increasing demands for better disaggregated data to shed light on people's diverse experiences with crime is Statistics Canada's Police-reported Indigenous and Racialized Identity Data Collection Initiative.Footnote 28Footnote 29
The importance of additional information and contextualization when using the CSI
Understanding crime in an area, and specifically the CSI, requires understanding which crimes are impacting the area and the factors influencing crime and reporting.
Every year, when police-reported information is published by Statistics Canada, a suite of data tables and analysis are accompanied by detailed footnotes and explanations to better understand changes in crime patterns. These are developed in part through discussions and follow-up with individual police services to better understand the changing nature of policing practices, initiatives, local crime trends or other relevant factors throughout the country.Footnote 30
Analytical articles published by Statistics Canada offer additional context with respect to larger crime trends, such as changes in property crime and hate crime at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, or online child sexual exploitation.
Footnotes in data tables and analyses provide important information on changes in legislation, local policing strategies, or complex types of crime involving cyber technology or organized crime elements.
For additional contextual information within and outside the criminal justice system, see the following resources:
For more information on the Crime Severity Index and other police-reported crime statistics, please contact the Canadian Centre for Justice and Community Safety Statistics at statcan.ccjcss-ccsjsc.statcan@statcan.gc.ca.
Data tables at various geographic levels are also available free of charge through the Statistics Canada website.
The following are methodological reports available either through the Statistics Canada website or from the Canadian Centre for Justice and Community Safety Statistics (internal reports):
Cormak, Andrew and Tracy Tabuchi. 2020. Updating the Police-Reported Crime Severity Index: Calculating 2018 Weights. Statistics Canada. Working paper SSMD-2020-01E .
Babyak, Colin, Aidan Campbell, Rose Evra and Sarah Franklin. 2013. Updating the Police-Reported Crime Severity Index Weights: Refinements to the Methodology. Statistics Canada. Working paper HSMD-2013-005E.
Babyak, Colin, Asma Alavi, Krista Collins, Amanda Halladay and Dawn Tapper. 2009. The Methodology of the Police-Reported Crime Severity Index. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. HSMD-2009-006E/F.
Wallace, Marnie, John Turner, Colin Babyak and Anthony Matarazzo. 2009. Measuring Crime in Canada: Introducing the Crime Severity Index and Improvements to the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-004-X.
Business performance and ownership
Health
Information and communications technology
Labour, income and spending
Population and demography
Society and community
