Canada is decidedly less innovative that many of its peers. Sheema Khan of Shapiro Cohen LLP finds out why

Canada ranked eighth in the 2014 United Nations Human Development Index, reflecting the nation’s measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, standards of living and quality of life relative to countries worldwide. Canada finished ahead of Denmark (10), Ireland (11), Sweden (12), the UK (14), Japan (17), France (20) and Finland (24). In addition, Canada ranked fifth in the 2015 UN World Happiness Report. Yet Canadians are in danger of seeing such prosperity and contentment decline if they do not improve upon innovation standards, according to a recent study by the Conference Board of Canada (CBC), which ranked Canada thirteenth out of 16 peer nations in innovation.

A nation’s level of innovation has long-term consequences for its prosperity. As Canada’s governor general, David Johnson, said in a recent interview: “We have to be more innovative if we want to continue to promise our children that life will be better for them than it was for their parents.”

The CBC measured 21 innovation indicators in order to gauge a country’s innovation, defined as “a process through which economic or social value is extracted from knowledge—through the creating, diffusing, and transforming of ideas—to produce new or improved products, services, processes, strategies, or capabilities”.

Despite its good universities, engineering schools, teaching hospitals, technical institutes and well-respected production of scientific research, the CBC gave Canada an overall grade of “D” when it comes to innovation. Contributing factors for this dismal record include poor performances in the following innovation indicators: patents by population, patents index, trademarks, venture capital, business enterprise research and development (R&D) spending and patenting firms less than five-years old.

The innovation indicators related to intellectual property warrant closer scrutiny, given the importance of this asset to a country’s economic potential.

For example, Canada ranked fourteenth out of 16 in patents by population, calculated by dividing the number of triadic patents (ie, applications for the same invention submitted to patent office in the US, the EU and Japan) filed by a nation with its population. The top five nations in this indicator are Japan, Switzerland, Sweden, Germany and Finland. Only Ireland and Australia rank behind Canada. While Canada’s performance in this indicator has steadily improved over the past three decades, it has not done so at a rate to keep up with its peers, and has consistently finished in the bottom five performers.

The patents index is the country share of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) triadic patent families divided by the country share of gross domestic product—it measures a country’s patent output relative to its economic size. A score of greater than one in the patents index means that a country is more successful in patenting than the size of its economy would warrant. Conversely, a score of less than one indicates that a country is less successful in patenting than the size of its economy would warrant. Canada ranked fourteenth out of 16 peer countries with a patenting index (PI) score of 0.42. The top country, Japan, scored 3, while Switzerland and Sweden followed with scores of 2.1. Only Ireland and Australia finished behind Canada.

This snapshot, however, does not tell the whole picture, as Canada has increased its PI score by 50 percent over the past three decades. It has overtaken Australia and Ireland during that period, while steadily closing in on the UK, the US, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France. Alternatively, the PI gap has widened between Canada and Austria, Denmark, Finland and Japan.

According to the CBC, the patenting firms less than five-years old indicator is the number of firms in a country that are less than five years old that have filed for patents at the European Patent Office, the US Patent and Trademark Office, or through the Patent Cooperation Treaty. According to the OECD, this indicator is important to innovation because it reflects “the dynamics of firms early in their development and their desire to develop new activities and products—which may affect their survival and growth”. That is, entrepreneurship is an important factor behind innovation.

Canada ranks thirteenth out of 15 peer nations in this indicator, while Denmark, Sweden and Finland are at the top. It is notable that national governments of Denmark and Finland have developed strategies and well-funded policies to enhance entrepreneurship in their respective nations.

Finally, the trademark indicator is the number of cross-border trademarks per million people. It provides a window into innovation in that the number of new trademark filings reflects product and marketing innovations. Trademarks also represent a large potential for financial value. Canada ranks fifteenth out of 16 peer nations in the trademark indicator, only ahead of Japan, while Switzerland ranks first, followed by Denmark.

Poor performances in these IP indicators—and the overall innovation index—have set off alarm bells among Canadian business, political and academic leaders. For example, former co-chief executive of Research in Motion, Jim Balsille, has called for these three sectors to come together to develop a cohesive, comprehensive strategy to address Canada’s innovation deficit. Such a strategy will also have to address sub-par performances in business enterprise R&D spending; export market shares in electronics, office machinery and computers, pharmaceuticals and instruments; venture capital; and connectivity.

One step in this direction is the 9 June 2015 announcement of innovation awards granted by the governor general, in order to recognise leaders in innovation and to enhance a culture of entrepreneurship throughout Canadian society, where different sectors come together.

IP professionals can play a key role in addressing the innovation deficit by educating key sectors about the value of IP in commercialisation. In addition, the many IP professionals who have doctoral degrees and/or R&D experience in small- and medium-sized enterprises can help to bridge the gap between business and academia. They will also play a valuable role in assessing patent landscapes and filing strategies.

Canadians have shown that they can address national challenges in the past. The future is no different.

Country profiles
The latest country profiles from IPPro The Internet
While Indian fair use is not explicit, provisions exist for the fair dealing of copyright. Rohit Singh and Tina Canneth of Abu-Ghazeleh Intellectual Property delve deeper
An interpretation of the current events exception in Radosavljević is creative, say BDK Advokati's Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović
IPPro Patents

Visit our sister site
for all the latest IP patents news and analysis
Yu-Li Tsai of Deep & Far examines how damages are calculated in patent infringement litigation
A recent amendment will make costly annulments a thing of the past. Gilberto Sanchez of SPECyF explains
New legislation in Turkey promises a swathe of trademark changes. Dr Cahit Suluk of Cahit Suluk Intellectual Property Law Firm explains
A trademark decision clarified ‘against the public order’ as an absolute ground for refusal. Sár and Partners – Danubia Patent & Law Office reports
Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović of BDK Advokati review the recent squabble about copyright protection for ‘routinely created photos’
Alston & Bird recently expanded with a new office focusing on counselling Chinese companies on US intellectual property law. Yitai Hu explains what patent owners face when working across borders
The latest features from IPPro The Internet
The US Supreme Court’s ruling in Star Athletica v Varsity Brands provides a path to copyrightability for pictorial or graphical elements of clothing designs and useful articles. Laura Ganoza and Julie McGinnis of Foley & Lardner explain
As Brexit negotiations begin, it is still unclear where trademarks fit in. But, with two years to get a good deal, the UK government needs to consider all aspects
Join Our Newsletter

Sign up today and never
miss the latest news or an issue again

Subscribe now
Rights holders that want to protect their valuable intellectual property have to be willing to change
Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are not being used to their full potential, according to IPzen’s Julia Cytrynbaum
India's copyright societies are subject to interim measures that boost transparency. DPS Parmar and Aniruddh Singh of LexOrbis report
Courts are wrestling with the legal definition of users of social networks. Nathalie Dreyfus examines how they have done so far
The BRICS IP Forum and the IP Summit allowed intellectual property professionals to reflect on a topsy-turvy 2016, and hope for a simpler 2017
Experts discuss what brands can do to protect their trademarks online during the Cyber Monday sales, with fakes widely available
The latest interviews from IPPro The Internet