page 1 biodiscovery toronto @ may 5, 2005. page 2 “institutions for collaboration” / “fourth...
TRANSCRIPT
Page 1
BioDiscovery Toronto
@
May 5 , 2005
Page 2
“Institutions for Collaboration” / “Fourth Pillar Organizations”
- central to the concept of clusters (Porter)- focus of Biotechnology Cluster Innovation Program
• The MaRS Discovery District represents an investment to create ‘physical capital’ in the form of a ‘hub’ organization for the commercialization of discoveries in the medical and related sciences.
• BioDiscovery Toronto represents an investment to create ‘social capital’ at MaRS through leveraging the business development capacity of 8 research hospitals and universities and providing a two-way interface with the bio-finance and bio-medical industries.
1. What kind of policy instruments can shape the evolution of clusters?
Page 3
To maximize commercialization of research in Toronto by linking
research, industry and capital
BioDiscovery Toronto Mandate
Focus
Provision of a fully functional central interface between the research community and industry as well as a facilitator of
cross-institutional activity
Page 4
– Networking that yields better leverage, focus, continuity, cohesion
– Better opportunities to bundle IP– Clearer ‘branding’– A dynamic public-private interface– ….. still missing is any real direct policy
support for ‘downstream’ private sector initiatives
2. What are policy outcomes & can they be linked to specific policy initiatives
Page 5
– IFCs are probably the best mechanism going– Too many levels of governance in Canada! – Should we really need such mechanisms?– Our approach is to try and collapse these!!
3. What mechanisms enable multi-level governance in the cluster?
Page 6
– Clusters are largely defined by the private sector
– Reverse the question … instead of asking‘what place is left in cluster governance mechanisms for the
private sector?’
– We should be asking ‘what mechanisms do the private sector believe to be
necessary for development of their cluster?’
4. What place do they leave for private sector participants?
Page 7
– Tendency to be focus on ‘ex post’ issues• presumably because science policy in Canada is very
much a process of ‘revealed preferences’.
– Should we not be concerned with the development of a more robust and transparent science and cluster policy process?• not only for Life Sciences but for all areas affecting
innovation systems?
5. Do we need a better science/cluster policy ‘process’ in Canada?
Page 8
Supplementary slides
Page 9
Ontario’s Life Sciences Gateway
SouthwestOntario Waterloo
London
GoldenHorseshoe
Toronto
York Region
WesternGTA
Peterborough Kingston
Ottawa &Eastern Ontario Northern
OntarioGuelph
Technology-basedSMEs
EntrepreneursResearchers
pursuing commercialopportunities
Regional Innovation Networks• Align Regional Resources (address gaps)
• Leverage Federal Funding• Linkages to business support infrastructure
• Linkages to Research Infrastructure
MaRS• Knowledge Management System (Gateway to the World)
• RIN Support e-tools (MaRS Web Portal)• Domestic / International VC Connections
• Commercialization Initiatives (Province Wide)
Page 10
CommercializationOpportunity bundling
Support for company creationNetwork of service providersManagement of BDO fund
InterfaceMarketingBranding
NetworkingCentral information resource
Member Institutions
Industry
Member Institutions
Capital
BioDiscovery Toronto Operational Model
Tech TransferMarket analysis
(internal/external)Best practices &
professional development
BioDiscovery TorontoInstitution for Collaboration
CustomersInputs