2008 Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge

2008
Annual Toronto Region
Innovation Gauge

2 Executive Summary
4 Introduction
6 At A Glance
8 Who We Are
18 What We Offer
27 How We Are Performing
32 Conclusion
34 ATRIG Advisory Council
36 Appendix 1 – Selection of Comparator Regions
43 Appendix 2 – Methodology/Data Sources
53 Appendix 3 – Selected Sector Profiles
58 Appendix 4 – List of Acronyms
59 Endnotes
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

1
2008 Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge

WHAT WE OFFER
The Toronto Region is particularly strong in a critically
important area that facilitates innovation – education in
the 25-34 age range. Its high and growing overall levels
of post-secondary and post-graduate residents include
Business, Science and Technology master’s and doctoral
graduates ready to become the next generation of
managers and entrepreneurs. The region would benefit
The Toronto Region has an innovative research base with
from even more post-secondary graduates and post-
a highly-educated and growing population that benefits
graduate degree holders (master's and doctorates) as
- Albert Szent-Gyorgyi,

from a diversified manufacturing base and other major
well as initiatives to encourage entry to these programs
Hungarian Biochemist, 1937 Nobel Prize for Medicine

advantages compared to its competition – that’s the
for even larger numbers of students.
good news.
The scale of R&D funding from private sources in the
However, the Toronto Region faces some significant
United States is much higher than in Canada, although
challenges to meeting its full potential to become one
collaborative private/public sector funding for R&D
of the top research capitals in the world. The obstacles
in the Toronto Region universities is increasing.
to be overcome include the need for even more post-
Unfortunately, the region performs relatively poorly
graduate students, stronger governmental support for
compared to other regions in government funding for
research and development, more private sector R&D,
R&D in the sciences, engineering and health related
and greater focus on knowledge and technology transfer.
areas, and in private sector R&D. It would benefit from
That’s the conclusion reached from a review of the Toronto more R&D investment from governments which would

HOW WE ARE PERFORMING
Region’s research and innovation system conducted by the lead to its R&D facilities and human resources becoming
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Toronto Region Research Alliance (TRRA). stronger, and its universities building a base upon which
The second edition of the Toronto Region Research their capacity to train graduate students and attract
Alliance’s Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge R&D-intense industries as partners.
“Research is to see what everybody else

(ATRIG) analyzes the current strengths and weaknesses
has seen, and to think what nobody

of the region relative to other regions with strong
else has thought.”

research bases, like Silicon Valley in California and The Toronto Region is publishing more and increasing
Massachusetts, and to more comparable research its numbers of licenses, inventions and patents. These
centres, like the Research Triangle in North Carolina, commercialization and knowledge transfer mechanisms
Montreal, Illinois and Michigan. are tangible proof that the region’s universities are
These findings will help key decision makers in transferring their R&D to the marketplace. But the region

WHO WE ARE IN SUMMARY
government, industry and post-secondary education is not matching the competition. It is not performing
better understand how the Toronto Region can grow and as well as many of its comparator regions in terms of
prosper by focusing attention on building a stronger relative impact – where it publishes and how much
research base that will benefit us all. it commercializes.

The population of the Toronto Region is growing rapidly, The Toronto Region has a strong foundation – a large and
fueled by an influx of skilled, educated immigrants from highly-educated population, diverse industries and high
around the world. The region’s economy benefits from employment rates, for instance – upon which it can build
diverse industrial sectors outside its traditional to improve its performance. But to compete successfully
manufacturing base (including “fast” companies with to become a truly innovative research base will require
strong potential for growth), solid employment levels, significantly more sustained efforts – and a collaborative
superior wages and healthy household income. Its approach between government, industry and the post-
high use of wireless communication is a sign of a secondary education sector.
technologically-connected and progressive society.

2

INTRODUCTION

3

The Toronto Region Research Alliance (TRRA) launched
the Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge (ATRIG) last TORONTO REGION PROFILE
year provide an accurate diagnosis
of the current strengths and weaknesses of the The Toronto Region, at the western end of Lake
region’s innovation system relative to key international Ontario, consists of Durham, Halton, Hamilton,
competitor regions. Guelph, Peel, Toronto, Waterloo, Wellington
and York. Over seven million people live in the
We believe that an annual analysis of the region’s Toronto Region, making it the fourth largest
innovation performance, based on a range of urban area in North America after New York,
internationally-accepted performance indicators, Los Angeles and Chicago.
is helpful to sustain and enhance the Toronto Region’s
innovation performance. For the purpose of this report The Toronto Region GDP is $328 billion,
we have used the same definition of innovation adopted accounting for 22% of Canada’s GDP. The region
by The Conference Board of Canada, “the ability to turn has a wide range of industrial sectors with
knowledge into new and improved goods and services.”1 strong employment, including Manufacturing
(529,000), Professional and Scientific services
We hope that the Innovation Gauge will become an (326,000), and Finance, Insurance and Real
increasingly comprehensive measure of the region’s Estate services (317,000).
comparative innovation performance, and will help
decision-makers undertake the changes needed to move The Toronto Region workforce is well-educated,
the Toronto Region into the top R&D and innovation- highly-skilled and growing: every year, 75,000
based economies in the world. university and college graduates and 47,000
immigrants enter a very skilled workforce of
The format of ATRIG 2007 was an important first step. more than 1.8 million.
In consultation with the ATRIG Advisory Council, we
INTRODUCTION

modeled its approach on the Index of the Massachusetts The region is attractive to immigrants. Forty-five
Innovation Economy (MA Index) developed by the percent of recent immigrants to Canada choose
Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (MTC). to live in the Toronto Region. In addition, 60%
of these newcomers have at least one university
While the MA Index offered a rigorous and comprehensive degree, which contributes to the region’s highly-
framework for measuring innovation performance, we educated workforce.
found that the Toronto Region lacked data routinely
captured and available in the United States on numerous The Toronto Region is Canada’s largest centre
innovation indicators – for the country as a whole and for for research and education, and is home to 9
the comparative regions in particular. With input from the universities, 8 colleges, and 12 research hospitals.
ATRIG Advisory Council, we addressed these challenges
in the 2008 report by selecting comparator regions and
indicators more relevant to the Toronto Region. An
understanding of the drivers of the economies of these We will continue to adapt the indicators we use for future
regions and what makes them strong will yield important Innovation Gauge releases as the region continues to
information and useful models for the Toronto Region. build on its capacity to monitor and assess the key
elements of the innovation system.

4

ATRIG brings a Toronto Region voice to the growing
chorus of organizations actively working to focus public HOW ATRIG SELECTED THIS YEAR’S
attention on critical innovation issues and their COMPARATOR REGIONS
relationship to our future competitiveness and prosperity.
This report compares the Toronto Region to
Reports alone, however, will not produce the changes Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montreal,
needed to strengthen the region’s innovation performance. North Carolina’s Research Triangle and
ATRIG is the first step in a broader process of informing, California’s Silicon Valley.
engaging and building consensus among the Toronto
Region innovation system stakeholders. Together, this We selected these comparator regions or states
impressive group of innovation stakeholders can help because they are similar in character, size,
shape the development of effective strategies, policies economic base or other attributes to the Toronto
and programs to address the region’s weaknesses and Region, or because they have economies – or

SPECIAL THANKS
capitalize on its strengths. attributes which make them strong research-
driven economies – to which we aspire. All
TRRA invites readers to participate in this process and we have significant R&D and strong innovation
welcome feedback. Please email us at info@trra.ca indicators, including many that show positive
trends over time.
In most cases ATRIG indicators are presented
TRRA is grateful for the assistance and guidance per 100,000 population in order to provide an
provided by the members of our ATRIG Advisory Council accurate picture of the scale of the various
(please see our acknowledgements, on page 34, for indicators in the Toronto Region relative to
a list of members). We look forward to their continued these comparator regions. For more information
participation and advice as we adapt and enhance ATRIG about the comparator regions, please refer to
in future years. Appendix 1.


5

COMPARATOR REGIONS
The Innovation Gauge compares the Toronto Region’s performance to
six regions that are – or have been – successful in innovation: Illinois,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Montreal, Research Triangle and Silicon
Valley. The comparators were selected based on: population,
proximity, industrial make-up, strong manufacturing base,
research intensity, and innovation performance.

INDICATORS
ATRIG indicators fall into three broad categories which paint a
picture of the Toronto Region’s innovation performance: who
we are – a description of the region’s population and economy;
The Annual Toronto Region
what we offer – factors that facilitate innovation; and how we
Innovation Gauge analyzes
perform – measures of innovative outputs.

IN SUMMARY
the region’s innovation performance,
based on a range of innovation
indicators. It highlights the current
strengths and weaknesses of the The Toronto Region has a strong foundation – a large and
region’s innovation system relative highly-educated population, diverse industries and high
to selected comparator regions. employment rates, for instance – upon which it can build
to improve its performance. But to compete successfully
to become a truly innovative research base will require
significantly more sustained efforts – and a collaborative
approach between government, industry and the post-
secondary education sector.

© 2008 Toronto Region Research Alliance TORONTO REGION
AT A GLANCE

York
Durham
Peel
Toronto
Guelph

Wellington

Waterloo

Halton

Hamilton-
Wentworth

6

The population of the Toronto Region The Toronto Region has high levels
is growing rapidly, fueled by an influx of post-secondary and post-graduate
of skilled, educated immigrants from education in the 25-34 age range, Like the comparators, the Toronto
around the world. The region’s with recent Business, Science and Region is publishing more and
economy benefits from diverse Technology graduates poised to increasing its numbers of licenses,
industrial sectors outside its become the next generation of inventions and patents. These
traditional manufacturing base managers and entrepreneurs. This commercialization and knowledge
(including “fast” companies with needs to be sustained. The scale of transfer mechanisms are tangible
strong potential for growth), solid private and public R&D funding in the proof that R&D is being transferred
employment levels, superior wages U.S. far outstrips Canada, although to the marketplace. The region is not
and healthy household income. collaborative private/public sector performing as well as many of its
funding for R&D in the Toronto comparators in terms of absolute
Region universities is increasing. numbers of technology transfers or
More government R&D investment relative impact – where it publishes
would strengthen the universities’ and how much it commercializes.
R&D facilities and human resources,
improve graduate training, making
the region more attractive to R&D-
intense industries as partners.
WHO WE ARE WHAT WE OFFER HOW WE ARE
PERFORMING

Average Relative Citations,
2000-2006
Silicon Valley 1.846
Massachusetts 1.841
Research Triangle 1.603
Illinois 1.511
Toronto
Region 45% Rest of

Michigan 1.511
55%
Canada

Toronto Region 1.409
Montreal 1.296
80,000 +
average population
increase in the
region each year 29% in publications,
a trend that matches all
45% of new comparator regions
immigrants to Canada 65% of workforce
settle in the Toronto 25-34 years of age Ahead of just one
Region has a post-secondary comparator in average
degree or diploma relative impact factors
Ahead of only one
comparator in the
number of engineers
graduating with a
Average 14 “fast bachelor’s degree
companies” per year
over the last 6 years 2x increase in NSERC
Collaborative Research
11 industrial sectors & Development project
above the average funding (’98-’08), from Improving on total
North American $5.1 to $10.2 million licenses, patents and
concentration, more invention disclosures
than comparator Lowest of all regions (’01-’06); however, the

regions in government R&D
highest performing
funding per capita
regions produce
4x more than the
Toronto Region

7

8

WHO WE ARE

With a population of more than seven million people population, however, is a quarter the size of the Toronto
(Fig. 1), the Toronto Region is the third largest of the Region. In absolute numbers, the Toronto Region grew
comparator regions. It has fewer people than Illinois three times more – by approximately 140,000 people –
and Michigan, but a larger population than the other than the Research Triangle, which grew by
comparator regions. The region’s population growth rate, approximately 45,000 people.
at almost 2% over the last 10 years (Fig. 2), is healthy,
The Toronto Region’s net natural increase in population
fueled by growing numbers of educated immigrants.
(i.e. births in the region) has remained steady at

THE TORONTO REGION HAS RELATIVELY
Household income is relatively high, and many people
approximately 40,000 persons per year. As Fig. 4 shows,

STRONG POPULATION GROWTH
subscribe to wireless services. Its industrial sectors
on balance, the population of the region increases by
are diverse, and the region fares well in the high
more than 80,000 persons annually – largely fueled by
technology-related fields.
immigration, (i.e. adding births to immigrant numbers
and subtracting migration from out of the region).
Indeed, the number of immigrants to the Toronto Region
has been more than double that of the Toronto Region’s
As Fig. 3 indicates, the Toronto Region’s closest closest comparator, the Research Triangle, in each year
comparator, the Research Triangle, has a greater between 2000 and 2006.
annual net migration. The Research Triangle’s

Population, 2007

Illinois 12.9
Michigan 10.1
Toronto Region 7.0

Massachusetts 6.4
Montreal 3.7
Silicon Valley 2.6


Population, Compound Average Annual Growth, 1996-2007
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Persons (millions)

Research Triangle 3.39%
Sources: Statistics Canada, Conference Board of Canada, U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance
Fig. 1

Toronto Region 1.92%
Silicon Valley 1.04%
Montreal 0.82%
Illinois 0.55%
Massachusetts 0.39%
Michigan 0.31%

0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%

Compound Average Annual Growth Rate
Fig. 2

Sources: Statistics Canada, Conference Board of Canada, U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance

9

Annual Net Migration (International and Domestic), 2000-2006

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Toronto Region
Fig. 3

-20

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Montreal
Massachusetts

-40
Silicon Valley
Research Triangle

Annual Components of Population Change, Toronto Region, 2000-2006
Michigan
Illinois
Number of Migrants (thousands)

Sources: Conference Board of Canada, U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance

131 128

100 100 100
93
140

92
120

100

80

60

40

-2 0
20

-14 -17 -17
-20
-26
0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
-20
Net International
Migration

-40
Net Domestic
Migration
Fig. 4

Net Natural
Increase

Source: Conference Board of Canada
Persons (Thousands)

10

MOST IMMIGRANTS ENTER THE REGION AS
HIGHLY-EDUCATED WORKERS
Canada, welcoming approximately 400,000 people. This
represents approximately. 60,000 more immigrants than
the region’s closest comparator, Silicon Valley, and three
The Toronto Region has been, and continues to be, a times more than its Canadian comparator, Montreal.
magnet for educated and experienced immigrants. Since
1961, more than a quarter of Ontario’s population (26.8%) This influx of immigrants is particularly good news for the
has been born outside Canada. This proportion is 33.0% Toronto Region. In the years between 2000 and 2006, the
in all city regions, but 43.4% in Toronto.2 Toronto Region welcomed increasing numbers of highly-
educated and skilled immigrants as Fig. 6 shows. Of these
Large numbers of educated immigrants are symptomatic immigrants, 73% are in the labour force (Fig. 6a) and, of
of a national trend. In 1995, 21% of immigrants to Canada this, 88% or approximately 196,000, are employed.
had a university degree; in 2000 this percentage had risen
to 26%. The percentage of native-born Canadians with The positive contribution of educated immigrants to the
university degrees rose at a much slower rate, from Toronto Region is corroborated by national studies, which
16% to 18% over the same period.3 show that a higher percentage of immigrants with post-
secondary education are entering the workforce. According
Results from the 2001 census indicated that immigration to a recent StatsCan study on immigrants to Canada, “in
has continued to be of growing importance to the region’s 2007, the largest gains in immigrant employment were
population.4 By 2006, of the 636,500 recent core working- among university-educated immigrants of core working
age immigrants who arrived in Canada, the lion’s share age. While employment for immigrants with other levels
went to Ontario’s labour market (51.1%), followed by of education was mostly unchanged, those with university
Quebec (19.2%) and British Columbia (15.9%).5 As Fig. 5 degrees had an estimated gain of 62,000 (+7.0%), all in
shows, between 2001 and 2006, the Toronto Region full time.”6
benefited from almost 45% of the new immigrants to

Number of Immigrants as a Percentage of the National Number, 2001-2006

45%
50

40

15%
30

6% 5%
3%
20

2% 0%
Toronto Region: 398,980
Montreal: 133,650

10
Silicon Valley: 341,207
Illinois: 279,358
Massachusetts: 178,329

0
Michigan: 119,974
Research Triangle: 17,593
Fig. 5
Percentage of National Immigration

Sources: Statistics Canada, U.S. Census Bureau
n

al

y

is

tts

n

le
lle
o

a
o

ng
re

ig
gi

se
in
Va
t

h
Re

ia
on

Ill

hu

ic

Tr
on

M
M
o

c
sa
nt

h
lic

rc
ro

as
Si

a
To

M

se
Re


11

Immigrants to the Toronto Region, Highest Level of Education,
Period of Immigration, 1991-2006

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2006
20

0
High School
Apprenticeship
College
Fig. 6

University

2006 Labour Force Status of Immigrants 2
Arriving Between 2001-2006
Years

Not in 27%

170

WHY ARE POPULATION GROWTH
Number of Immigrants (Thousands)

73% In
Labour Force

AND IMMIGRATION IMPORTANT?
12
109

86

85

81

Labour Force

THE TORONTO REGION IMMIGRANT
59

EMPLOYMENT COUNCIL (TRIEC)
14

36

The high rate of population growth in the Toronto Region
Established in September 2003, TRIEC is
26

is widely considered to be a requirement for economic
17

comprised of employers, labour, occupational
15

growth, providing human capital and a constant influx of
regulatory bodies, post-secondary institutions,
talent. As Dr. Larry Swanson, associate director of the
assessment service providers, community
Source: Statistics Canada

University of Montana’s O’Connor Center for the Rocky
organizations, and all three levels of government.
Mountain West pointed out, “economic strength follows
Its primary goal is to find and implement local
population strength: population growth means economic
solutions that help break down the barriers
growth and diversification; population loss means
immigrants face when looking for work in the
Fig. 6a

economic loss or stagnation.”7
Toronto Region.
73% of immigrants

Immigrants – particularly the well-educated
“The Toronto Region continues to attract large
(221,000) arriving between

immigrants who are coming to the Toronto Region –
numbers of skilled immigrants who comprise
are of particular importance in bolstering labour force
2001-2006 are in the labour

virtually all net labour force growth in the region,”
growth. Immigrants enrich the Toronto Region with their
says TRIEC director Elizabeth McIsaac. “This
force. Of this number:

skills, training and life experiences, augmenting the
offers the local economy a competitive advantage
region’s foundation for innovation. In fact, the Caledon
if the skills and knowledge of these workers can
– 196,000 were employed (88%)

Institute of Social Policy points to immigrants as a
be effectively leveraged and integrated.”
counterpoint to the much-debated “brain drain.”8
– 25,000 were unemployed (12%)

12

Immigrants also add what one researcher calls “knowledge
spillover,” the learning and transfer of knowledge between ENCOURAGING IMMIGRATION OF SKILLED AND
individuals and firms that precedes innovation. EDUCATED WORKERS
“Innovations occur when individuals with high degrees • Ontario now has an uncapped number of work
of existing creativity or knowledge make new and novel permits available to foreign workers. For intra-
combinations of this knowledge with new insights observed company transfers, the process is fast and
or learned through spillovers,” say Brian Knudsen, Richard straightforward: transferees can quickly obtain
Florida, Gary Gates, and Kevin Stolarick in Urban Density, a work permit for up to seven years.
Creativity, and Innovation. They go on to point out that such (www.cic.investinontario.com/bi)
spillovers occur “when one individual’s creativity is
transferred to another individual or firm. These creative • Ontario’s Provincial Nominee Program, an
spillovers are in part believed to arise due to frequent expedited permanent resident visa program,
face-to-face interactions and communication allows employers to permanently recruit high-
between individuals.”9 end research staff and other workers within
defined occupations.
Is the Toronto Region taking full advantage of this (www.ontarioimmigration.ca/english/pnp.asp)
latent potential?
• The 2007 federal budget created a Foreign
Recognition of immigrants’ credentials has been a Credential Recognition office (which has,
stumbling block in the past. According to data from however, so far limited itself to giving referrals
Status of Women Canada, just over half of foreign-trained to appropriate provincial offices).*
professionals are working in professions or trades three
years after immigrating.10 In addition, the human capital • In November 2007, Ottawa announced
of increasing number of immigrants from eastern expanded foreign credential referral services
Europe, south, east and west Asia and Africa who are in India and China that offer orientation

EMPLOYMENT IN KEY INDUSTRIAL
now arriving (rising from 35% in 1981 to 72% in 2001) sessions for potential immigrants.*

SECTORS IS STRONG
“may initially be less transferable due to potential issues
regarding language, cultural differences, education
quality, and possibly discrimination.”11

strong regional focus and expertise in many sectors
outside its traditional manufacturing base. Fig. 7 shows
The Toronto Region has high levels of employment in key that the Toronto Region has a wide range of industrial
non-manufacturing industrial sectors, largely due to its
* The Conference Board of Canada, The Canada Project Progress

sectors, and that the majority of industries in the Toronto
Report 2007: The Roads Not Travelled: Insights You Can Count On,
(Ottawa: The Conference Board, 2008)

Industry Sectors, by Size, Average Wage, and Relative North American
Concentration, Toronto Region, 2006

100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
Finance & Insurance

50,000
Utilities

40,000
Health Care & Professional, Scientific
Social Assistance & Technical Services

30,000
Public Information &
Cultural Industries

0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50
Administration Educational Services

20,000
Retail Trade
Construction Wholesale Trade

10,000
Other Services

0
Manufacturing

Waste Management & Transportation and Warehousing

Location Quotient
Remediation Service Agriculture, Forestry, Real Estate &
Fishing & Hunting Rental Leasing
Arts, Entertainment
Fig. 7

Accommodation & Food Services & Recreation

($) Average Wage


13

Region are performing better than in the rest of Canada.
The X-axis of this graph shows its Location Quotient (LQ) –
the employment concentration of industry clusters in the
Toronto Region compared to the same industry clusters
across North America. Industries with a LQ of one are
performing at the average level. Those with a score higher The region has high levels of employment in the
than one have a higher competitive advantage. The Fig. 7 Manufacturing and Professional, Scientific and Technical
also shows that salaries are high in many of the region’s sectors as well as in Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
larger and stronger sectors. The relative size of the sector and compares favorably to Silicon Valley and
– Meric Gertler,

sphere shows the number of people employed in the Massachusetts, in each of these sectors (Fig. 8). This
Dean of Arts and Science, University of Toronto

sector, and many sectors in the region are quite large. is of particular importance as these regions are strong
performers in both R&D and innovation performance.

Industrial Employment, Percentage in Key Sectors, 2007

Professional, Scientific and Technical Services
4.6%
“…what you’re looking at here is really a

3.0%
2.9%
story of diversity versus one of specialization.”

4.3%
Toronto Region

5.1%
Michigan

8.2%
Illinois

4.1%
Montreal

Manufacturing
Research Triangle
Silicon Valley

7.6%
Massachusetts

6.1%
5.2%
7.1%
Toronto Region

3.5%
Michigan

6.2%
Illinois

4.3%
Montreal
Research Triangle

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Services
Silicon Valley

4.4%
Fig. 8

Massachusetts

2.2%
3.4%
3.4%
Toronto Region

2.6%
Michigan

2.6%
Illinois

4.0%
Montreal

0 2 4 6 8
Research Triangle
Silicon Valley
Massachusetts

% of Total Employment in Area


14

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ARE DIVERSE MANY “FIRMS TO WATCH”
The Toronto Region has a wide range of specializations The Toronto Region has many successful high-tech
and many occupations within the working population “firms to watch.” As Fig. 10 shows, the region fares well
(Fig. 9). Approximately 75% of these occupations require among its comparators with fastest-growing technology
specialized training and education, indicating the region firms in North America between 2001 and 2007.
has a labour force which is “rich” in specialized skills
While the region pales in comparison to the numbers
and education.
in Silicon Valley and Massachusetts, it performs well
in comparison to other selected regions, consistently
out-performing Montreal, Research Triangle, Illinois
and Michigan.

Labour Force by Occupation, Toronto Region, 2006

and Utilities 7%
A. Management 11%
I. Primary Industry 1%
J. Processing, Manufacturing

and Related 13%
and Administrative 21%
H. Trades, Transport and

G. Sales and Service 22%
Equipment Operators
B. Business, Finance

Sciences and Related 8%

D. Health 5%
and Sport 4%
C. Natural and Applied

and Religion 8%
F. Art, Culture, Recreation

Technology “Fast 500 Companies” Annual Average Number, 2001-2007
E. Social Science, Education,
Government Service
Fig. 9

62
Source: Statistics Canada

70

60

35
50

40

14
8 8 7
30

2
20

10

0
Fig. 10

Source: Deloitte and Touche
Average Number of Companies

y

ts

on

al

e

is

n
le

gl

ga
o
et

re
gi
l

in
n
Va

hi
us

t
Re

ia
on

Ill

ic
Tr
ch
on

M
M
o
sa

nt

h
lic

rc
ro
as
Si

a
To
M

se
Re

15

Median Household Income, Constant 2006 USD, 2000 and 2006

80

60

40

20

WHY IS A DIVERSE ECONOMY IMPORTANT? WHY IS HOUSEHOLD INCOME IMPORTANT?
2000
2006
Fig. 11

Diversity in the Toronto Region industry and multiple Good household income is a sign of overall economic
78.8

employment sectors has contributed to stronger prosperity and can act as an indicator of innovation.

WIRELESS SUBSCRIBER RATE IS HIGH
73.3

population growth than in areas that are heavily reliant The Toronto Region ranks high in this category, likely

ACROSS THE REGION
on a manufacturing base. Furthermore, the region’s due to its diverse industrial sectors, relatively low
Sources: Statistics Canada, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor-Bureau of Labor Statistics

diverse areas of specialization add economic stability. unemployment rate, and the consistent growth in
Because the Toronto Region is not dependent upon one its economy since the early 1990s.
56.2

54.4

53.6
53.4

sector, its economy may not be as vulnerable when one
50.5
($) Thousands

50.3
49.3

49.3
48.8

47.1
sector is suffering, because others are available to
support the economy.
38.9

HOUSEHOLD INCOME GROWTH IS HEALTHY
34.9

Many strong industrial sectors indicate that the Toronto The Toronto Region is keeping up with or is on par with
Region is doing an excellent job of maintaining and the comparator regions with respect to number of
growing non-manufacturing related industries and subscribers to wireless communications and services
supplying the human capital required for these jobs. (Fig. 12). Since 2001, however, the region has fallen
behind relative to its comparators. In 2001, the Toronto

WHY IS WIRELESS SUBSCRIPTION IMPORTANT?
y

ts

on

le

is

al

n

Region had the highest number of subscribers, with a
lle

ga
no
ng
et

re
gi
Va

hi
us

t
i
Re

ia

10% advantage over its closest comparators, Silicon
on
Ill

ic

The Toronto Region’s average household income growth,
Tr
ch
on

M
M
to
sa

Valley and the Research Triangle. By 2006, the region
ch
lic

n

while lower than in Massachusetts and Silicon Valley, is
ro
as

ar
Si

To

had fallen to third in this indicator.
M

se

healthy (see Fig. 11). The Toronto Region’s diverse
Re

industrial make-up will likely ensure that the region will
continue to fare better than the U.S. comparator regions
as the economic downturn in the United States begins to The Toronto Region’s high number of subscribers to
affect America’s overall income growth. wireless communications indicates a technologically-
Michigan and Illinois have already shown declines in connected and progressive society.
household income due to the decline of manufacturing in
these regions. A more diversified economy has prevented
this from happening in the Toronto Region.

16

Suscribers to Wireless Communications and Services,
Percentage of Population, 2001 and 2006

82 80 79
75 73
68
100

60 59
49 50 47
45 46
80

41
60

40

20

0
2001
2006
Fig. 12

THE BOTTOM LINE
• Toronto Region has a strong and growing population base
• Toronto Region attracts and retains skilled immigrants
• Toronto Region has a diverse economy, with strong industrial clusters in key areas
Sources: FCC, Statistics Canada
Percent of Population

• Toronto Region is tech savvy and inter-connected
• The Toronto Region has “fast companies” with highlighted potential for growth
y

le

on

s

tts

n

al
lle

oi

ga
ng

re
gi

se
in
Va

hi

t
Re
ia

on
Ill

hu

ic
Tr
on

M

M
to

c
sa
ch
lic

n
ro

as
ar
Si

To

M
se
Re


17

18

WHAT WE OFFER

Educated residents and funding for Research & While the region does not perform well in terms of
Development (R&D) are essential for innovation. overall numbers of citizens with post-graduate and
The Toronto Region has much to offer in these areas. professional degrees in the total workforce compared to
The region has high and growing overall numbers the selected comparators in the U.S., there has been a
of residents with post-secondary and post-graduate 2% overall increase in this measure (an increase of more
degrees. In addition, both government and private sector than 17,000 people) since 2001 (Fig. 14). Only Montreal
support for R&D in the region has increased, including has enjoyed comparable growth. Indeed, the dramatic
collaborative R&D delivered by universities and colleges. increase in post-graduate and professional degrees

HIGH AND GROWING LEVELS OF
between 2001 and 2006 shows a healthy positive trend

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION
that many of the comparators have failed to replicate.
Some of the U.S. comparators experienced a decline
in this category, and many showed very small growth.
More Business, Science and Technology master’s and
doctorate graduates are ready to become the next
generation of managers and professionals.
The Toronto Region is doing well with respect to overall
level of education for the age range 25-34 years. These
recent college and university graduates represent the GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR
“new” workforce. POST-GRADUATE EDUCATION
As Fig. 13 illustrates, the Toronto Region comes first The Reaching Higher plan, unveiled in the
in college or university education in this age range and 2005 Ontario Budget, targeted 14,000 new
within the comparator selection. A larger percentage post-graduate spaces school by 2009/10.
of the Toronto Region’s population has a college or It also identified an additional 104 first-year
university education than any of the comparator regions undergraduate medical spaces by 2008/09.
in this age range, with more than 65% of the population This program was part of the Ontario
in 2006 holding at least a college diploma or associate’s government’s $6.2 billion investment
degree. This represents an increase from 56% in 2001. in post-secondary education.
(www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/tcu/about/annualreport)

Percent of Population 25-34 years with a Post-Secondary Degree
or Diploma, 2001 and 2006
EDUCATION

70

60

50

40

30
2001
2006
Fig. 13
65.2

60.3

56.8
55.2
% of Population 25-34

56

53.8
53.3

51.9
53

49.9

41.9
40.8

35.6
35.2

n

al

y

tts

e

is

n
le

gl
io

a
o
re

ig
se
l

in
g

n
Va
t

h
Re

ia
on

Ill
u

ic
Tr
ch
on

M
M
o

sa
nt

ch
lic
ro

as

ar
Si
To

M

se
Re

19

Percent of Population Aged 25-34 years with a Post-Graduate and
Professional Degree, 2001 and 2006

18
17
15
14 14
13
20

10 10
16

8 8 8
7
6 6
12

8

4

0
2001

2006
Fig. 14

As Fig. 15 shows, in the period 2006-2007, the Toronto “Cities with larger concentrations of degree holders –
Region graduated more students in the category “all measured as a percentage of the local employment
other university fields” than in business, science and base – have, on balance, experienced faster employment
technology. A closer look at the graduations in that growth – 2.0% per annum – than cities with smaller
period, however, shows that a greater number of post- relative concentrations of degree holders – 1.6%. These
graduate degrees were awarded in business science and differences may appear to be small but, due to
Sources: Conference Board of Canada, U.S. Census Bureau, California Department of Finance, MA Index

technology as well as in professional degrees in medical- compound growth, over the 20-year study period a city
Percent of Population 25-34

related fields and law (Fig. 16). This indicates that the that grew at 2% would grow by 49%, while a city with a
overall education of the population is good at the growth rate of 1.6% would grow by a more modest 37%.”
undergraduate level and that more students are
selecting professional post-graduate studies which
adds to the talent pool of highly qualified individuals.
Fig. 17 shows that the Toronto Region is graduating fewer
This is likely to persist, with higher enrolment levels in
engineers per 100,000 than comparator regions. There
post-graduate programs in Toronto Region universities.
has, however, been a positive upturn in the graduation rate
These individuals are particularly important in light since 2001, with marked increases in undergraduate,
– Desmond Beckstead, W. Mark Brown and Guy Gellatly,
Cities and Growth: The Left Brain. Stats Canada, 2008, p. 17.

of another important study, which found that in 2001, master’s and doctorate degrees in engineering.
Ontario managers still had a way to go to catch up
This rate of increase needs to be sustained and improved
y

ts

le

is

on

al

n
lle

ga
no
ng
et

re

with U.S. managers’ education levels. In 1996, 46% of
gi
Va

hi
us

t

in all professional, scientific and technical disciplines to
i

Re
ia

on
Ill

ic
Tr

U.S. managers had a university degree, compared to
ch
on

M
M
to

grow the workforce of the future. Even though the Toronto
sa

ch
lic

n

considerably fewer (31%) of Ontario managers. Ontario
ro
as

ar
Si

Region graduates fewer engineers, in absolute numbers,
To
M

se

results for 2001 indicated that although the educational
Re

than the comparator regions, the number of engineers
attainment of Ontario managers has increased, the
graduating has been steadily increasing, with 30% more
province’s results in 2001 still did not match U.S. results
bachelor’s between 2002 and 2007, for instance.
for 1996. A higher percentage of Ontario managers had
less than a high school diploma, and fewer Ontario
managers had a high school diploma, a bachelor’s
degree, or a graduate degree.12

20

Percent of Population 25-34 years with a
Post-Secondary Degree or Diploma, 2001 and 2006

Business, Science
21,000
and Technology

All Other
26,000
University Fields

0 5,000 10,00 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

Post-graduate Business, Science and Technology, and Other
Educational Degrees Awarded in the Toronto Region
Number of Degrees

2006-2007 Academic Year
Source: CUDO

Business, Science 4,017 669
Fig. 15

and Technology

All Other
3,460 543
University Fields

Engineering Degrees Awarded, per 100,000 Population, 2002 and 2007
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000
Master’s

Number of Degrees
Degree
Doctorate

8 12 12
Source: CUDO

8
32 37
Fig. 16

150

57 76 5 4
3 3
125

8
3 3
28 21 22 21
13
100

88 83 24 1 13 3 4
8
46 40 41 45 10 12
40 32 41 40 30 39
75

21 20
50

25

0
2002 2007
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Fig. 17

Sources: CUDO, American Assoication of Engineering Societies Inc., Montreal Universities
Number of Degrees per 100,000

le

y

ts

n

al

on

is
lle

ga

o
ng

et

re

gi

in
Va

hi
us

t

Re
ia

on

Ill
ic
Tr

ch
on

M

M

o
sa

nt
ch

lic

ro
as
ar

Si

To
M
se
Re

21

THE TORONTO REGION NEEDS MORE
RESIDENTS WITH UNIVERSITY DEGREES,
PARTICULARLY POST-GRADUATE DEGREES
received by them and less skilled workers widens. As
emerging economies, like China and India, advance, we
can expect that less-skilled workers in the developed
economies will fall further behind. There will also be
The high level of residents in the age range 25-34 who greater competitive pressure on higher skilled workers,
have first degrees and diplomas shows that the value of as China and India move up the value chain and compete
education is recognized in the Toronto Region. on more sophisticated bases.”
Overall, the Toronto Region has fewer citizens with
university degrees than select U.S. comparators. The
U.S. has, however, far more post-secondary institutions – “We find significant interactions between scientists and
4,000 colleges and universities13 – than Canada, including engineers and the broader cross-section of degree
many private universities giving citizens greater access holders located in cities: the latter may be the primary
to higher education. Canadian and US qualifications are mechanism through which scientists and engineers
– Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity,
Prosperity, Inequality and Poverty, Sept. 2007, p. 8.

not, however, directly comparable as accreditation of contribute to the growth process. In short, scientists
institutions is voluntary in the U.S., not regulated by and engineers – the left brain of cities – matter most for
government as it is in Canada. Independent accrediting growth when combined with a large and diverse pool of
organizations are approved by the government and define human capital.”
minimum standards of education in the U.S. These
organizations then certify whether schools, post-
secondary institutions and other education providers’
academic program meet and maintain that standard.14
The entities which conduct accreditation are associations TORONTO REGION’S FLEXIBLE PART-TIME
comprised of institutions and academic specialists in MASTER’S PROGRAM IN ENGINEERING
– Desmond Beckstead, W. Mark Brown and Guy Gellatly,

specific subjects.15
Cities and Growth: The Left Brain. Stats Canada, 2008, p. 32.

Toronto’s Advanced Design and Manufacturing
Furthermore, the region has relatively fewer residents Institute (ADMI) is a unique commitment to
with post-graduate education; i.e., individuals who hold achieve excellence in graduate engineering
master’s, professional degrees (such as M.B.A. or M.D.) education. The Faculties of Engineering and/or
or doctorates. As Michael McKenzie points out in a 2007 Applied Science and the Business Schools of
StatsCan report, “people who hold doctorates are an the partnering universities collaborate to deliver
important piston in Canada’s labour force engine. They a quality master’s degree program in Design
not only represent the highest educational attainment and Manufacturing. The program builds on the
level in a knowledge-based economy, they are also highly expertise in manufacturing and design of four
skilled industrial researchers and innovators, teachers of the strongest academic programs available
and professors and scientists who take care of our in the province of Ontario, and integrates
health as well.”16 the elements of business practices and
More people with higher-level degrees would contribute management skills so essential in the

WHY EDUCATION RESOURCES ARE IMPORTANT
dollars as well as expertise to the Toronto Region competitive engineering marketplace.
economy. The earning power of post-secondary graduates (www.admicanada.com)
is considerably higher than for those who do not complete
university or college. According to StatsCan figures for
2000, the average salary of a Canadian resident was
$32,000. For an Ontario resident, it was $36,000. For a
Toronto Region resident, it was $42,000. Science and In the past, the traditional Ontario manufacturing base
engineering doctorates in Toronto earned about double: provided high-paying jobs which typically did not require
$81,450 for doctorates working in the private sector and post-secondary education. Today, blue collar jobs that
$83,321 for doctorates working in the public sector, for provide a middle class lifestyle are much less frequently
an average annual income of $82,115 for both sectors.17 available to the new entrant to the workforce and are on
Canada’s Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity the decline within the working population.
corroborates these findings, pointing out that “In both the As a recent StatsCan study pointed out, “there has been
stock and flow of science and engineering graduates, we a transformation of the work force toward workers with
trail the U.S. in graduate degrees.”18 higher skill levels, and those cities that are better able to
“…an emerging consensus is that as the world’s attract these kinds of workers may end up the winners in
economies become even more sophisticated, highly this new age.”19
skilled workers are simply more valuable and earn
higher incomes. And the difference in economic rewards

22

There has been a transition from “doing” to “thinking” A large number of scientists and engineers in a city
jobs, and studies confirm that a highly-educated can make tremendous contributions to its research,
workforce is essential for innovation. As one report economic growth and technological innovation. They
completed for the government of Ontario says, “new can also forge important synergies with other degree-
graduates, who have had the opportunity to participate in holders, and drive innovation much more forcefully than
the conduct of basic research, enter industry equipped the other degree-holders could on their own. As the
with training, knowledge, networks and expertise. They StatsCan paper Cities and Growth: The Left Brain puts
bring to the firm knowledge of recent scientific research, it, “scientists and engineers – the left brain of cities –
as well as an ability to solve complex problems, perform matter most for growth when combined with a large
research, and develop ideas. The skills developed and diverse pool of human capital.”21
through their educational experience with advanced
instrumentation, techniques and scientific methods are
extremely valuable Students also bring with them a set
of qualifications, helping set standards for knowledge
in an industry.”20

THE BOTTOM LINE
• The Toronto Region needs to sustain and grow its numbers of post-secondary graduates at the first degree
or diploma level (bachelor’s degrees and college diplomas or certificates)
• The Toronto Region needs to be able to translate its current competitive advantage into more master’s and
doctorate degrees
• Toronto Region needs to assess barriers to entry for students with respect to graduate degrees. We need
to look at whether there are enough graduate positions, whether the system needs to be more flexible and
accessible, and whether there should be more interaction with industry


23

educational resources available at Canadian post-
secondary institutions and to train students in essential
technical skills required by industry.25
Research & Development (R&D) funding includes support The scale of available government assistance and funding
from the private sector, support from the public sector as for R&D in the U.S. is much higher than in Canada
well as joint support from both, in collaboration with one (Fig. 19). Within Canada, Greater Montreal receives
another. Research and development provides knowledge more R&D funding per capita than the Toronto Region.
and technologies for transfer to the market and funding
here is important to ensure sufficient supply of these.
Private sector support for R&D in the Toronto Region is THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CANADIAN AND
increasing. In fact, by international G8 standards, Canada U.S. GOVERNMENT SUPPORT OF PRIVATE
as a whole does well: the private sector funds more than SECTOR R&D
10% of university research.22 The Canadian and U.S. governments take a
Research conducted at universities, whether at a basic significantly different approach to supporting
level or in partnership with industry is fundamental to the private sector R&D. According to 2004 data, in
development of a competitive R&D infrastructure and, Canada, government spends about 0.18% of GDP
hence, innovation within Canada.23 whereas governments in the U.S. spend about
0.26% of GDP on such support. The countries
As Fig. 18 shows, the Toronto Region is conducting differ in level of support provided relative to the
increasing amounts of R&D which involves collaboration sizes of economies, with the US almost 45%
between industry and universities. One important higher, and in the mix of direct versus indirect
measure of this is the growing contribution that the funding. In Canada, about 84% of the support is
National Sciences and Engineering Research Council in the form of tax credits (indirect), most notably
(NSERC) Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) the Scientific Research & Experimental
Grants program has been making to the Toronto Region. Development (SR&ED) program and the balance
RESEARCH &

NSERC is a federal agency that invests in university (16%) is direct (grants, loans, etc). In the U.S.,
DEVELOPMENT FUNDING

research and training in the natural sciences and most support (76%) is in the form of direct
engineering by encouraging Canadian companies to grants and similar payments, with the balance
invest in university R&D.24 Its CRD grants program is (24%) in the form of tax incentives.
intended to give companies that operate from a Canadian
base access to the unique knowledge, expertise, and

NSERC Collaborative Research and Development Project
OECD, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook, 2006

Expenditures in Toronto Region, 1997-2008 (Constant 2006 CAD)

10.0

8.4 10.3
12

6.9 8.4
5.7 5.8 7.8
10

6.0 6.3
8

4 5.1
6

2

0
Fig. 18

Source: NSERC
Millions

8

9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8
-9

-9

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0

-0
97

98

99

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07
19

19

19

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

24

There is no single strategy that will improve this situation
in the Toronto Region. The current range of strategies, PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR
including some new initiatives, have the potential to R&D AND ADVANCED MANUFACTURING JOBS
make an impact on and further strengthen the region’s
Ontario will make $150 million available over
growing ability to attract more research funds to the
region’s institutions as well as more research-intensive the next five years to attract new or enhanced
firms. These include an increasing number of government biopharmaceutical investments to the province,
through its Biopharmaceutical Investment
initiatives aimed at educational institutes and research-
Program (BIP). The provincial government will
intensive firms, as well as mechanisms to indirectly
assist in funding private sector research such as federal use these funds to support up to 20% of total
eligible project costs. This public sector
R&D tax credits.
investment will increase the province’s level
Spending on R&D in both the private and public of new biopharmaceutical R&D and advanced
sectors is low manufacturing, expand the footprint of local
As Fig.19 shows, the Toronto Region ranks poorly businesses, create new high value jobs for
and is fifth out of seven in the natural sciences and Ontarians, increase “deal flow” within Ontario’s
infrastructure, faring better in social science, and last growing biotech cluster, and build capacity through
in health. In addition, in terms of private sector R&D, collaborations with public research institutions.
despite the increasing the amount of collaborative R&D The government is also funding the Strategic Oppor-
it funds, the fact is clear that the Toronto Region is tunities Program (SOP), a five-year discretionary,
considerably lower in reported per capita expenditures non-entitlement grant program that supports
on R&D than all of the other comparator regions, except strategic, industry-led programs and projects in
Montreal (Fig. 20). targeted areas of strength for Ontario including:
• Bio-economy and clean technologies
• Advanced health technologies, and
• Digital media and Information and

Federal Government R&D Funding
Communications technologies (ICT).

to Research Institutions, Per Capita,
2000-2007, Constant 2006 USD
(www.mri.gov.on.ca/english/programs/bip/ program.asp,
www.mri.gov.on.ca/english/programs/sop/ program.asp)

1,000
Federal Research Health Funding

800
Federal Research Natural Sciences Funding
Federal Research Infrastructure Funding
Federal Research Social Funding

600

400

200
Fig. 19

0
4,258

2,568

1,242

Sources: NSERC, CFI, CIHR, SSHRC, NIH, NSF
Dollars

422

390
280

254
238

169
164

167

142
280

121

88

74
67
66

61

63
52

46
40
40

35
28
25
24

13
le

ts

is

n

on
y

al
ga
lle

o
ng

et

re
in

gi
hi
us

Va
ia

t

Re
Ill

on
ic
Tr

ch

on

M

M

o
sa
ch

nt
lic
as
ar

ro
Si
M
se

To
Re

25

R&D expenditure per $1000 USD sales per 100,000 people, 2007
4.5 4.28
4.0
3.5

1.34
3.0

0.83
2.5

0.33 0.16
2.0

0.09 0.04
1.5

WHY R&D FUNDING IS IMPORTANT
le
y
gl
e ts a n is io
n al
l et ig in
o
tre
1.0

Va ia
n s
ich Il l eg on
on Tr hu R
ac M to M
0.5

lic h
Si rc as
s on
a or
0

se M T
Re

technology from around the world, the latest tools, the
latest techniques and processes learned from their work
The presence of R&D facilities moves industry “up the under the very best researchers, they graduate with much
food chain,” from branch plants that manufacture goods fanfare and go on to build the industry, institutions and
into central facilities that create goods and wealth. society of our country.”28
R&D staff in industry seek and maintain good R&D jobs tend to be highly paid, and are taken by
relationships with universities. This is encouraged professionals, raising the overall economic base and
Fig. 20

Source: Standard and Poor’s COMPUSTAT

by employers and strengthens the link between both socioeconomic level of a region.
groups. Industries’ R&D departments add applicability
to university training and add academic intelligence to Post-secondary graduates tend to be comfortable around
industry, substantially benefitting both parties.26, 27 innovation and the adoption of new ideas and technologies,
increasing the overall “innovativeness” of the area.
R&D facilities in the private sector create opportunities
for highly-trained post-secondary graduates. They create Government funding for R&D in universities upgrades
high value-add employment for post-secondary graduates the supply of innovation by encouraging competition for
trained in the Toronto Region, thereby encouraging them peer-reviewed R&D funding and interest from venture
to stay in the region. They also ensure that the Toronto capitalists.29
Region can attract highly-educated immigrants and Support of R&D within the private sector supports the
employ them at an appropriate level. In addition, they management talent necessary to commercialize R&D
strengthen innovation within the region by stimulating ideas. As highlighted by Roger L. Martin, “technical
networks and interactions between and among the strengths in science and technology are probably the
academic community and its counterpart in industry. most important contributors to the quantity and quality of
As Mike Lazaridis, founder, President and co-CEO of the supply of innovation. Management skills are critical to
Waterloo-based Research in Motion said in his 2004 organizing R&D efforts, for setting priorities, developing
presentation to the fourth annual Re$earch Money strategies, and acquiring resources. Good management
Conference in Ottawa, “if you really want to understand skills also provide the pressure to ensure high quality
commercialization, all you have to do is attend convocation resource allocation decisions among competing priorities
at your local university ... Armed with cutting edge for research funding.”30

THE BOTTOM LINE
• The Toronto Region needs R&D investment from the federal and provincial governments to strengthen the
R&D infrastructure and build a base upon which to train graduate students and attract R&D-intense
industries as partners
• The Toronto Region needs to attract more R&D-intensive companies
• The Toronto Region needs to look at barriers to R&D in the region and in general

26

PERFORMING
HOW WE ARE


27

$205 MILLION IN NEW VENTURE CAPITAL FOR
The Conference Board of Canada report Innovation
INNOVATIVE, HIGH-GROWTH COMPANIES
Overview (2008) states “Innovation is the ability to turn
knowledge into new and improved goods and services.” In June 2008, the Ontario government and
ATRIG looked at the quantitative measures of the Toronto leading institutional investors launched the new
Region’s commercialization and knowledge transfer $205-million Ontario Venture Capital Fund to
mechanisms – the publications, invention disclosures, strengthen the province’s venture capital sector
patent applications, patents granted and licenses. In the to support growing innovation. TD Capital Private
Toronto Region our institutions are important as they are Equity Investors is the fund manager. Other
the main producers of these outputs and these provide leading intuitional partners include: OMERS
tangible evidence that the region’s R&D is being transferred Capital Partners, RBC Capital Partners, Manulife
from the region’s research institutions to the market. Financial, Business Development Bank of
Canada, TD Bank Financial Group, and the
Knowledge transfer in the Toronto Region is improving
Government of Ontario.
The Toronto Region is performing well with respect to
The Ontario Venture Capital Fund will invest
overall quantity of scientific publications. The number of
primarily in Ontario-focused venture capital
publications has increased over time (Fig. 21), however,
and growth funds. These funds will enable the
this upward trend is one which is being demonstrated
province’s venture capital sector to better support
by all comparator regions (Fig. 22). In fact, most of
innovative, high-growth companies in Ontario by
the comparators are publishing more, per 100,000
making it easier for them to find the investment,
population, and only Illinois and Michigan trail the
expertise and support they need.
Toronto Region.
Says Rob MacLellan, Chief Investment Officer, TD
The impact of Toronto Region publications is low
Bank, “as patient venture capital investors, we're
The Toronto Region is publishing more, but the relative confident the Ontario Venture Capital Fund can
R&D INDICATORS

impact, as measured by Average Relative Impact Factor not only produce attractive returns but can also
(a weighted measure of citations in science and social have a significant impact on creating a virtuous
science journals that demonstrates the importance of a cycle that will drive incremental investment in
journal to its field) is lower. Montreal is the only comparator world-class Ontario-based technology and
region that has a lower relative impact (Fig. 23). innovation over the long term.”34, 35, 36

Number of Scientific Publications by Authors at
Toronto Region Universities, 2000-2006

10,952

10,182
11,500

9,044
8,871
10,500

8,041
7,810
9,500

7,646

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
8,500

7,500
Fig. 21

Source: OST
Number of Publications

28

Number of Scientific Publications per 100,000 Population, 2000-2006

800

700

600
Silicon Valley

500
Research Triangle

400

300
Massachusetts

200

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
100
Montreal

0

Average Relative Impact Factors (ARIF) of Publications, 2000-2006
Toronto Region
Illinois
Michigan
Fig. 22

Source: OST

1.5

1.4
Massachusetts
Silicon Valley

1.3
Research Triangle
Illinois

1.2
Michigan

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Toronto Region

1.1
Montreal
Fig. 23

Source: OST
ARIF


29

Relative citations show the same pattern (Fig. 24). This
indicator shows the average number of times papers MARS INNOVATION TO ACCELERATE
from Toronto Region academics are referenced by other COMMERCIALIZATION
academics, providing an indication of the relevance of the
MaRS Innovation is one of 11 new federally-supported
work as determined by academic peers.
Centres of Excellence for Commercialization and
The Toronto Region’s relative impact – where we Research (CECRs) announced in February 2008.
publish and how much we commercialize – is low, MaRS Innovation is a joint venture between the
but, is increasing. MaRS Centre, University of Toronto and Toronto’s
In terms of the identification, protection and transfer research hospitals to offer global industry a one
of intellectual property, the total licenses, discoveries, stop linkage into the Toronto research engine.
patents and inventions from Toronto Region universities The partnership received $14.9 million in federal
and research hospitals between 2001 and 2006 has CECR funding over five years to accelerate the
almost doubled (Fig. 25). No other comparator region commercialization of promising research from
has increased so dramatically. While the Toronto Region its member institutions. Joint teams from MaRS
performs relatively poorly on technology commercialization Innovation and each institution will work with
(as measured in patents granted and licensing revenue) researchers to identify discoveries that can be used
in comparison to Silicon Valley and Massachusetts, the as the basis for new companies or used by existing
region’s performance is, however, comparable to Illinois, companies. MaRS Innovation will focus on delivering
Michigan, the Research Triangle and Montreal. the best of Toronto’s innovations in a timely, effective
and industry focused manner. www.marsdd.com

Average Relative Citations (ARC), 2000-2006

Silicon Valley 1.846
Massachusetts 1.841
Illinois 1.511
Michigan 1.511
Toronto Region 1.409
Montreal 1.296

1.25 1.35 1.45 1.55 1.65 1.75 1.85

Total Licenses, Patents (Applications and Issued), and Invention
ARC

Disclosures, Universities and Hospitals, per 100,000 Population, 2001

Silicon Valley 168
132
64
Source: OST

Research Triangle 77
Massachusetts 58
Fig. 24

43
Montreal 13
13
Toronto Region 13
7
Illinois 12
8
Michigan 9
7
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
2006
2001
Fig. 25

Source: AUTM

30

R&D indicators encourage collaboration and networking
by publicizing work currently underway. As the MIT study
also points out, in addition to education, universities also
play an important indirect role in serving as a “public
Transferring research to the market in the form of space for ongoing local conversations about the future
publication or intellectual property allows universities direction of technologies and markets. The importance
to realize their potential as economic drivers. Research of the public space role of the university and its
papers developed in universities that result in patents contribution to local innovation performance is
and licenses translate academic discoveries into often underestimated.”33
innovative approaches and tangible products which
eventually make their way to the market. A large number of patents, publications and licenses
indicates not only research excellence, but also innovation
One study completed in 2006 for the University of Toronto’s capacity, the ability to transfer research to the market.
Centre for International Studies Program on Globalization
and Regional Innovation Systems put together a number The number of patents, publications and licenses
of conclusions from various researchers about the communicate the status of the Toronto Region’s R&D
importance of this knowledge transfer: compared to that of the rest of the world.

• University research is important to local firms not just The number of disclosures, patents and licenses
for the transfer of knowledge generated through the communicate the relevance of the Toronto Region’s
university’s own research activities, but also as a conduit research activities to the market.
enabling firms to access knowledge from the “global
pipelines” of international academic research networks.
• Universities serve as attractors of talent from THE ONTARIO CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE (OCE)
elsewhere that contributes to the “thickness” of the CENTRE FOR THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF
local labour market. RESEARCH (CCR)
WHY ARE THE OUTPUTS OF R&D

• Universities often function as “good community The Centre for the Commercialization of
players” rather than “ivory towers” insulated from their Research (CCR), led by The Ontario Centres
IMPORTANT?

community. They facilitate local linkages and networks, of Excellence, will help ensure that new
and serve as “anchors of creativity” that sustain the technologies developed by Canada’s outstanding
virtuous cycle of talent attraction and retention.31 research universities reach the global
marketplace. Its initial focus will be on
Another study, completed for the Massachusetts Institute
commercializing new technology discoveries
of Technology, points out that universities play an
related to the environment, natural resources and
important role in helping attract new human, knowledge
energy, health and related life sciences, and
and financial resources from elsewhere. In addition, “they
digital media. CCR will also develop technical and
can help to adapt knowledge originating elsewhere to
managerial talent nationally, to more effectively
local conditions. They can help to integrate previously
commercialize technology.38 www.oce-ontario.org
separate areas of technological activity. They can help to
unlock and redirect knowledge that is already present in
the region but not being put to productive use.”32

THE BOTTOM LINE
• The Toronto Region has a strong foundation – a large and highly-educated population, diverse industries and
high employment rates – upon which it can build to improve its performance
• The Toronto Region has the programs and initiatives in place to strengthen its capacity and drivers for
commercialization
• The Toronto Region’s performance with respect to R&D outputs is relatively weak; the region needs to
continue focusing on this area

31

32

CONCLUSION

The Toronto Region has a strong foundation – a large and OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT
educated population and diverse industries, among other
pillars of strength. Even though the Toronto Region is • More R&D investment in the Toronto Region from the
publishing more, and issuing more patents and licenses, public and private sectors
it is important to build on these strengths through more • Better public recognition for the R&D strengths and

TORONTO REGION STRENGTHS
private and public sector investment in R&D. These other related “attributes” in the region, as well as a
initiatives will ensure that the Toronto Region starts better understanding of the strengths we have.
producing and reaches its potential for innovation.

The Toronto Region is strong in the “feeders”
for innovation: Future TRRA reports will focus in on specific areas of
• Population growth research that indicate how the Toronto Region is doing in
innovation in addition to comparing the Toronto Region to
• Positive immigration others. TRRA will be sharing:
• Attraction of skilled and educated immigrants • The results of our study on the Toronto Region’s labour
• Strong key industrial sectors including sectors outside force
manufacturing, which have high levels of employment • Our research and initial findings on networks within the
• Good postsecondary education levels in society and advanced manufacturing labour market

IMPROVEMENTS “IN THE WORKS”
strong growth in level of educational attainment • A look on the products of innovation in the Toronto
• A growing number of licenses, patents and inventions Region – influences on and increases in our
from its universities and hospitals. performance with respect to patents, research papers
and licenses
• An in-depth look at key areas of immigration in the
The Toronto Region is taking measures to improve Toronto Region as well as effectively immigrants are
some of its weaker areas – graduate education and being integrated and engaged
commercialization: • A look at how the Toronto region compares with respect
• Large increases in the enrolment numbers of to copyright materials, an aspect of innovation not
students to graduate programs at the master’s and considered in ATRIG this year.
doctorate level
COMING UP IN FUTURE

• Federal initiatives and provincial programs to
encourage the discovery process and increase output
TRRA REPORTS

of innovations from our institutions
• Provincial programs to encourage companies to hire
staff in high-value jobs.


33

Mr. Michael Benedict Mr. John Tennant
Principal, MCB Strategies Inc. CEO
Canada’s Technology Triangle Inc.
Mr. Charles Davis
Edward S. Rogers Sr. Research Chair in Media Dr. David Wolfe
Management and Entrepreneurship Co-Director, Program on Globalization and Regional

PRIMARY AUTHOR
Ryerson University Innovation Systems
University of Toronto
Dr. Paul Genest
President & CEO
Council of Ontario Universities
Mr. John Hoicka
Senior Research and Policy Advisor Dr. Karen Sievewright

RESEARCH ASSISTANTS
Colleges Ontario Director, Research
Ms. Elizabeth McIsaac TRRA
Executive Director
TRIEC
Mr. James Milway
Executive Director Bettina Cheung
Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity Odila Duru
Martin Prosperity Institute Alex Hunt
Ms. Avvey Peters Richard Liang
ATRIG ADVISORY COUNCIL

Executive Director, Communications Michael Wolfe
& Government Relations Andrew Wong
Communitech
Mr. Shahrokh Shahabi-Azad
Senior Economist, Innovation and Corporate Policy
Branch, Ministry of Research and Innovation
Ms. José Sigouin
Research and Information Analysis
Ms. Natasha Tang Kai
Senior Advisor, Performance Measurement and Results
Ministry of Research and Innovation

34

ENDNOTES
APPENDICES &


35

Six regions were chosen against which to compare the Toronto Region’s performance. These regions are – or have been
– successful in areas similar to the Toronto Region, and many represent the best in their respective areas of success.
The following criteria were considered when choosing the comparators:
Population: While the spread in population of our comparators is quite large (1.6 to 12.9 million), the Toronto Region
comes fairly close to the average at 7 million. Regions with too small or too large a population were excluded.
Proximity: Geographically close regions with similar natural attributes were selected as these have similar economic
and infrastructural influences.
Industrial make-up: The selected regions have a similar range of industries and employment levels within
these industries.
Strong manufacturing base: While the Toronto Region historically has had a very strong manufacturing base, the
sector has experienced recent declines. Due to the significance of this industry, certain other regions strong in
manufacturing were selected to compare to the Toronto Region.
Research intensity: Research and innovation are key contributors to the new knowledge-based economy. The Toronto
Region, therefore, is compared to other research-intensive areas.
Model regions: Regions which present models that the Toronto Region could aspire to become were selected. The
comparator regions are all considered to be successful in one aspect or another. For example, Silicon Valley performs very
well in certain indicators and, even though it is not realistic that the Toronto Region performs on par or better than this
area, it is still useful to see where the Toronto Region ranks in relation to successful regions.
APPENDIX 1 – SELECTION OF COMPARATOR REGIONS

36

COMPARATOR REGIONS
Illinois: Illinois has a strong economy and is geographically close to the Toronto Region. These similarities warrant
its inclusion in the 2008 report. The state is located just south of Lake Michigan, and has a population of 12.9 million
people.46 In 2006, the gross state product in Illinois was $589 billion US dollars. Much of the state’s economic success
occurs in Chicago, a major financial and high technology city.47
Chicago has high employment in information technology industries,48 with manufacturing also playing an important, but
declining, role in the city’s economy. The city is an important financial centre, and home to three major financial exchanges.
Many large organizations and businesses are headquartered in Chicago, including a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Industry Sectors by Size, Average Wage, and Relative North American
Illinois is a R&D centre and nine universities are located in the state. The University of Chicago and Northwestern

Concentration, Illinois, 2006
University perform extremely well in various school rankings.49

110,000
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
Utilities
Finance & Insurance

50,000
Professional, Scientific
& Technical Services

40,000
Information &
Cultural Industries
Wholesale Trade

30,000
Health Care & Manufacturing

0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
Real Estate &

20,000
Social Assistance
Rental Leasing

10,000
0
Construction Retail Trade

Transportation &
Warehousing

Location Quotient
Educational Other Services
Arts, Entertainment
Services
& Recreation Waste Management &
Accommodation &
Remediation Service
Food Services

($) Average Wage


37

Massachusetts: Massachusetts is a successful state, with a gross state product of $338 billion US dollars. At 6.4 million
people, it is very similar in size to the Toronto Region.50 Massachusetts has transitioned from a manufacturing
economy,51 to one that is a centre of higher education, biotechnology and finance.
Massachusetts is in the northeastern United States. Boston is the major urban centre in the state and is a major
component of the Massachusetts economy. The state is a R&D-intensive area, supported by many universities and colleges.
The Greater Boston area has over 40 colleges and universities, a number of which are highly-respected and ranked.
Massachusetts is an ideal comparator for the Toronto Region, as its proximity and population allow for similar

conditions. The state is also an important model, having successfully transformed its economy to take advantage of

Concentration, Massachusetts, 2006
new technologies and research.

110,000
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
Finance & Insurance

60,000

Utilities

50,000
Wholesale Trade Management of Companies & Enterprises

40,000
Manufacturing

30,000
Construction Real Estate &

0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50
20,000
Rental Leasing
Information &

10,000
Cultural Industries
Other Services

0
Health Care &
Transportation Social Assistance
& Warehousing

Location Quotient
Arts, Entertainment Educational Services
Retail Trade
& Recreation
Waste Management Accommodation
& Remediation Service & Food Services

($) Average Wage

38

Michigan: Similar to Illinois, Michigan is good comparator region. It is close to the Toronto Region and is known for its
strong manufacturing base. The state is just east of Lake Michigan, which composes the bulk of its enormous shoreline.52
Michigan’s population is 10.1 million, and its largest city is Detroit, with a population of just over 900 000 people.53, 54
While best known for its automotive industry, the state has diversified lately, partly in response to the decline
manufacturing has experienced. The economy now includes information technology and life sciences industries,55
and has increased R&D expenditures in these areas.56, 57 Michigan is home to the Michigan Life Sciences Corridor

(a $1 billion biotech initiative),58 and has a number of large research institutions.

Concentration, Michigan, 2006

100,000
90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000
50,000
Finance & Insurance Professional, Scientific
Utilities

40,000
Information & Management of
Cultural Industries Wholesale Trade Companies & Enterprises

30,000
Manufacturing
Health Care &
Construction

0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50
20,000
Social Assistance

Waste Management &

10,000
Real Estate & Remediation Service
Rental Leasing

0
Transportation
& Warehousing Arts, Entertainment

Location Quotient
& Recreation
Retail Trade
Accommodation Other Services
& Food Services

($) Average Wage


39

Montreal: Montreal is the second largest census metropolitan area (CMA) in Canada,39 with a population of just over
3.5 million people. The CMA includes the island of Montreal and a number of densely-populated suburbs.
In 2007, Montreal’s GDP was $123 billion40 and the region has industrial strengths in aerospace, electronics,
pharmaceuticals, software engineering, finance and higher education.41
Many research facilities and agencies are located in the Montreal CMA, including the Canadian Space Agency and the
National Research Council.42, 43 There are 11 universities and 12 public colleges located in the region, making the region
the second-highest ratio of students per capita in North America 44, 45 Montreal conducts and receives significant
research and research dollars as is shown in exhibits 19 and 22.

Montreal was selected as the only Canadian comparator in the 2008 Innovation Gauge because of its strong research

Concentration, Montreal, 2006
focus, proximity to the Toronto Region, and its successful economy.

70,000

60,000

50,000
Finance & Insurance

40,000
& Technical Services Transportation &

30,000
Warehousing
Manufacturing
Health Care &
Social Assistance Retail Trade

20,000
Real Estate &
Rental and Leasing

0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50
10,000
Utilities
Information &

0
Cultural Industries

Arts, Entertainment
Construction & Recreation

Location Quotient
Other Services
Wholesale Trade

($) Average Wage

40

Silicon Valley: Silicon Valley is located in the southern part of the San Francisco Bay Area. The region has a population
of 2.6 million people, and is commonly recognized as one of the most successful regions in North America.59
Silicon Valley is a leader in high technology with thousands of related companies operating within its boundaries. The
region also has a high number of Fortune 1000 companies.60 Silicon Valley attracts a large number of engineers and
venture capital.
There are five universities within Silicon Valley, with Carnegie Melon and Stanford being amongst them. Because of
this, and the nature of the businesses and research in Silicon Valley, the population is highly-educated and the region

attracts a large amount of public research funding.61 Often the pinnacle in North American innovation, research, and

Concentration, Silicon Valley, 2006
development, Silicon Valley represents a compelling story for the possibilities provided through innovation.

180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000
Management of

100,000
Companies & Enterprises

80,000
Manufacturing

Wholesale Trade Information &

60,000
Finance & Insurance
Cultural Industries

40,000

0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75
Construction Transportation &
Warehousing

20,000
Health Care &
Social Assistance
Educational Services

0
Real Estate &
Rental Leasing Professional, Scientific
Waste Management &

Location Quotient
Other Remediation Service
Services
Arts, Entertainment
Accommodation & Recreation
Retail Trade & Food Services

($) Average Wage


41

Research Triangle: Located in North Carolina, the Research Triangle is made up of three cities – Raleigh, Durham and
Chapel Hill – and has a population of 1.6 million people.62 The region consists of numerous high technology businesses
and has a highly-educated population.63
The region is home to Research Triangle Park, one of the largest research parks in the United States.64 A growing
number of high technology firms have contributed to the region’s growth over the past years.65 IBM, Nortel Networks,
and Cisco Systems all have large offices in the Research Triangle.
There are over 10 colleges and universities within the Research Triangle.66 This dense research infrastructure makes
the Research Triangle similar to the Toronto Region in many ways, and sets many goals that the Toronto Region should
try and emulate in some capacity.
Note: In three cases, entire states were used over municipalities for the U.S. comparators (e.g., Massachusetts instead
of Boston) as they were thought to be a more suitable comparison to the Toronto Region because they include both

urban and rural areas and due to limitations in the data available at the municipal level.

Concentration, Research Triangle, 2006

90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000
Wholesale Trade

40,000
Finance & Insurance & Technical Services
Manufacturing

30,000
Health Care &
Social Assistance
Construction

20,000

0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80
Management of Companies

10,000
& Enterprises

Real Estate &

0
Rental Leasing

Transportation Other Educational Services
Retail Trade
& Warehousing Services

Location Quotient
Accommodation &
Food Services
Waste Management &
Remediation Service

($) Average Wage

42

DEFINITION OF REGIONS
Toronto Region (TR): Unless otherwise stated, the Toronto Region data is calculated by using five Census Metropolitan
Areas (CMA): Guelph, Hamilton, Kitchener, Oshawa and Toronto.
Montreal (MTL): Unless otherwise stated, Montreal is defined as the Statistics Canada CMA.
Research Triangle (RT): Unless otherwise stated, the RT is defined as the micropolitan area of Raleigh-Carey-Dunn.
Silicon Valley (SV): Unless otherwise stated, SV is defined as the counties Santa Clara and San Mateo.
Illinois (IL): IL refers to the state of Illinois.

( # of 1years ) -1
Massachusetts (MA): MA refers to the state of Massachusetts.

( )
Michigan (MI): MI refers to the state of Michigan.

Fig. 1 – Population, 2007
The data was found from population surveys from the US Census Bureau, the California Department of Finance,
Statistics Canada, and additional data from the Conference Board of Canada.
Sources
Silicon Valley:
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Estimates/E2/documents/E-2%20Report.xls
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Estimates/E6/E6-90-00/documents/E-6_90-00.xls
APPENDIX 2 – METHODOLOGY/DATA SOURCES

Toronto Region:
Conference Board - Population - TR - 1996-2012 - Nov 2007 (private purchased data) *does not include Guelph
Montreal:
http://cansim2.statcan.ca/cgi-
win/cnsmcgi.exe?Lang=E&RootDir=CII/&ResultTemplate=CII/CII___&Array_Pick=1&ArrayId=0510034
U.S. Comparator States:
http://www.censU.S..gov/popest/states/tables/NST-EST2007-01.xls
http://www.censU.S..gov/popest/metro/files/2007/CSA-EST2007-alldata.csv
http://www.censU.S..gov/popest/archives/1990s/ST-99-03.txt

Fig. 2 – Population, Compound Average Annual Growth, 1996-2007
The population data from Figure 1 was used to calculate the compound annual growth rate from 1996-2007. The
formula was:

CAGR = Ending Value
Beginning Value

Sources
Silicon Valley:
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Estimates/E6/E6-90-00/documents/E-6_90-00.xls
Toronto Region: *does not include Guelph
Conference Board - Population - TR - 1996-2012 - Nov 2007 (private purchased data)

43

Montreal:

Fig. 3 – Annual Net Migration (International and Domestic), 2000-2006
For the U.S. states and the RT the data was taken from the U.S. intercensal estimates. The data for SV came from the
California Department of Finance. Both the Toronto Region data and the Montreal data are from the Conference Board
of Canada. For the Toronto Region and Montreal, the net domestic migration was calculated by adding the net
interprovincial migration with the net intercity migration. The net migration was calculated by adding the net
international migration, the net interprovincial migration, and the net intercity migration.
Sources
Toronto Region:
Montreal:
Conference Board – Demograhpics – TR, Van, Mtl, Cgy – 1995-2010 (private purchased data)
Research Triangle:
http://www.censU.S..gov/popest/archives/1990s/co-99-08/99C8_37.txt
http://www.censU.S..gov/popest/metro/files/2007/CBSA-EST2007-alldata.csv
Silicon Valley:

Fig. 4 – Annual Components of Population Change, Toronto Region 2000-2006
The Toronto Region data is from the Conference Board of Canada. For the Toronto Region, the net domestic migration
was calculated by adding the net interprovincial migration with the net intercity migration. The net migration was
calculated by adding the net international migration, the net interprovincial migration, and the net intercity migration.
Source
Toronto Region:

Fig. 5 – Number of Immigrants as a Percentage of the National Number, 2001-2006
The number of immigrants in was summed for each of ATRIG Comparitor regions between 2001-2006. This number
was then calculated as a percent of the total national number of immigrants.

44

Sources
Toronto Region & Montreal:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/censU.S.06/data/topics/RetrieveProductTable.cfm?Temporal=2006&PID=93716&GID=8
37928&METH=1&APATH=3&PTYPE=88971&THEME=72&AID=&FREE=0&FOCU.S.=&VID=0&GC=99&GK=NA&RL=0&d1=
5&d2=6&d3=0&d4=0
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table04.xls
Research Triangle & Silicon Valley:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table05.xls

Fig. 6 – Immigrants to the Toronto Region, Highest Level of Education, Period of Immigration, 1991-2006
The TR data is from Statistics Canada. For the TR, the number of immigrants at different education levels was summed
from 1991-2006 at 5 year intervals. They were separated by highest level of reported education, high school,
apprenticeship, college, and university, as seen in the charts, and then graphed to show the trend over 3 time periods.
For the year 2006, this chart includes only the immigration numbers from January 2006 to May 16, 2006.
Source
Toronto Region:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/censU.S.06/data/topics/RetrieveProductTable.cfm?Temporal=2006&PID=93716&GID=8
37928&METH=1&APATH=3&PTYPE=88971&THEME=72&AID=&FREE=0&FOCU.S.=&VID=0&GC=99&GK=NA&RL=0&d1=
5&d2=6&d3=0&d4=0

Fig. 7 – Industry Sectors by Size, Average Wage and Relative North American Concentration, Toronto Region, 2006
The data was taken from the U.S. Census Bureau and Statistics Canada. To make the NAICS codes comparable across
Canada and the United States, NAICS 99 (industry unclassified) was removed for the U.S. comparators, as this data does
not exist for the Canadian comparators. Also, the U.S. NAICS code 42 was changed to 41 to match the Canadian NAICS,
both of which are for ‘wholesale trade.’
As Statistics Canada does not provide data on the average wage for particular NAICS codes, this was estimated using
the following method. The average wage for Montreal and the TR was calculated by summing the number of employees
in each North American Occupation Classification (NOC) sub code from each CMA into each major NOC code. Secondly,
the average wages of each NOC sub code was used to calculate the average wages for the major NOC codes for each
CMA. The average wage for each major NOC code for each NAICS code was then calculated using a weighted average
based on the number of employees. Finally, the average wage for each NOC code for each NAICS code was weighted by
the number of employees in the corresponding NOC code and then summed.
Sources
Toronto Region and Montreal:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/censU.S.06/data/topics/RetrieveProductTable.cfm?ALEVEL=3&APATH=3&CATNO=97-
559-XCB2006023&DETAIL=0&DIM=&DS=99&FL=0&FREE=0&GAL=&GC=99&GK=NA&GRP=0&IPS=97-559-XCB2006023
&METH=0&ORDER=&PID=92116&PTYPE=88971&RL=0&S=1&ShowAll=&StartRow=&SUB=&Temporal=2006&Theme=7
4&VID=&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=
Canada:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/censU.S.06/data/highlights/labour/Table602.cfm?Lang=E&T=602&GH=4&SC=1&SO=9
9&O=A
United States:
http://factfinder.censU.S..gov/servlet/GQRTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000U.S.&-ds_name=CB0600A1&-_lang=en

45

Research Triangle:
http://factfinder.censU.S..gov/servlet/GQRTable?_bm=y&-ds_name=CB0600A1&-geo_id=31000U.S.20380&-_lang=en
Silicon Valley:
Massachusetts:
Michigan:
Illinois:

Fig. 8 – Industrial Employment, Percentage in Key Sectors, 2007
The data was taken from the U.S. Census Bureau and Statistics Canada. To make the NAICS codes comparable across
Canada and the United States, NAICS 99 (industry unclassified) was removed for the U.S. comparators, as this data
does not exist for the Canadian comparators. Also, the U.S. NAICS code 42 was changed to 41 to match the Canadian
NAICS, both of which are for ‘wholesale trade.’
As Statistics Canada does not provide data on the average wage for particular NAICS codes, this was estimated using
the following method. The average wage for Montreal and the TR was calculated by summing the number of employees
in each North American Occupation Classification (NOC) sub code from each CMA into each major NOC code. Secondly,
the average wages of each NOC sub code was used to calculate the average wages for the major NOC codes for each
CMA. The average wage for each major NOC code for each NAICS code was then calculated using a weighted average
based on the number of employees. Finally, the average wage for each NOC code for each NAICS code was weighted by
the number of employees in the corresponding NOC code and then summed.
Sources
Toronto Region and Montreal:
Canada:
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/censU.S.06/data/highlights/labour/Table602.cfm?Lang=E&T=602&GH=4&SC=1&SO=9
9&O=A
United States:
http://factfinder.censU.S..gov/servlet/GQRTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000U.S.&-ds_name=CB0600A1&-_lang=en
Research Triangle:

46

Silicon Valley:
Massachusetts:
Michigan:
Illinois:

Fig. 9 – Labour Force by Occupation, Toronto Region, 2006
The data is from Statistics Canada. The minor NOC codes within each major NOC code were summed for each
comparator region.
Source

Fig. 10 – Technology “Fast 500 Companies”, Annual Average Number, 2001-2007
The data was taken from the Deloitte and Touche annual list of technology fast 500 companies in North America
from 2001 to 2007. The number for each year was added, then divided by 7 to derive the average annual number over
the period.
Sources
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/section_node/0,1042,sid%253D56072,00.html
Deloitte – Technology Fast 500 – 2001

Fig. 11 – Median Household Income, Constant 2006 USD, 2000 and 2006
The data was taken from Statistics Canada, the U.S. Census. Bureau, and the U.S. Department of Labour. The three
year median income was found for the TR and all of the Comparators. These numbers were then converted into
constant 2005 dollars, which were then converted into 2006 dollars using the GDP/CPI Index. Finally, the TR and
Montreal data was converted to U.S. dollars using the Organisation for Economic Development’s (OECD) purchasing
power parity (PPP) numbers.
Sources
Toronto Region:
2000 Median Income: Statistics Canada - CANSIM 2020411
2006 Median Income: OECD - Purchasing Power Parities Data
http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,3343,en_2649_34347_36202863_1_1_1_1,00.html#ppp

47

Montreal:
2000 Median Income: Statistics Canada - CANSIM 3800056
2006 Median Income: OECD - Purchasing Power Parities Data
http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,3343,en_2649_34347_36202863_1_1_1_1,00.html#ppp
Massachusetts, Illinois and Michigan
2000 Median Income and 2006 Median Income: US Census Bureau - Current Population Survey
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h08b.html

Silicon Valley:
2000 Median Income: Census 2000- The number was taken off an interactive map for theSanta Clara and San Mateo
Counties. Because the information was not available before Census 2000, this number was weighted by population and
taken as the median household income for that 3 year average.
Link: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-_MapEvent=zoom&-errMsg=&-
_useSS=N&-_dBy=040&-redoLog=false&-_zoomLevel=10&-tm_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00024&-tm_config=|b=50|l
=en|t=403|zf=0.0|ms=thm_def|dw=1.9557697048764706E7|dh=1.4455689123E7|dt=gov.census.aff.domain.map.LSRMap
Extent|if=gif|cx=-
1159354.4733499996|cy=7122022.5|zl=10|pz=10|bo=|bl=|ft=350:349:335:389:388:332:331|fl=403:381:204:380:369:379:368
|g=01000US|ds=DEC_2000_SF3_U|sb=50|tud=false|db=040|mn=9243|mx=82929|cc=1|cm=1|cn=5|cb=|um=Dollars|pr=0|
th=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00024|sf=N|sg=&-PANEL_ID=tm_result&-_pageY=&-_lang=en&-geo_id=01000US&-
_pageX=&-_mapY=&-_mapX=&-_latitude=&-_pan=&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U&-_longitude=&-_changeMap=Identi
fy#?416,218
2006 Median Household Income: US Census Bureau - American Community Survey
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&_submenuId=datasets_2&_lang=en

Research Triangle:
2000 Median Income: Census 2000- The number was taken off an interactive map for the Raleigh-Dunn-Chapel Hill
Metropolitan area Because the information was not available before Census 2000, this number was taken as the
median household income for that 3 year average.
Link: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-_MapEvent=zoom&-errMsg=&-
_useSS=N&-_dBy=040&-redoLog=false&-_zoomLevel=10&-tm_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00024&-tm_config=|b=50|l
=en|t=403|zf=0.0|ms=thm_def|dw=1.9557697048764706E7|dh=1.4455689123E7|dt=gov.census.aff.domain.map.LSRMap
Extent|if=gif|cx=-
1159354.4733499996|cy=7122022.5|zl=10|pz=10|bo=|bl=|ft=350:349:335:389:388:332:331|fl=403:381:204:380:369:379:368
|g=01000US|ds=DEC_2000_SF3_U|sb=50|tud=false|db=040|mn=9243|mx=82929|cc=1|cm=1|cn=5|cb=|um=Dollars|pr=0|
th=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00024|sf=N|sg=&-PANEL_ID=tm_result&-_pageY=&-_lang=en&-geo_id=01000US&-
_pageX=&-_mapY=&-_mapX=&-_latitude=&-_pan=&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U&-_longitude=&-_changeMap=Identi
fy#?416,218
2006 Median Household Income: US Census Bureau
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/STTable?_bm=y&-context=st&-qr_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_S1901&-
ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_&-CONTEXT=st&-tree_id=306&-keyword=Durham&-redoLog=false&-_caller=geoselect
&-geo_id=31000US20380&-format=&-_lang=en

48

Fig. 12 – Subscribers to Communications and Services, Percentage of Population, 2001 and 2006
The data is from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Statistics Canada. The population numbers from
Fig. 1 were used to calculate percentages.
Sources
U.S. Comparator Regions:
2006 FCC Report
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-28A1.pdf
2004,5 FCC Report
2002,3 FCC Report
2001 FCC Report;
Canada – Toronto Region & Montreal:
win/cnsmcgi.pgm?regtkt=&C2Sub=&ARRAYID=2030020&C2DB=&VEC=&LANG=E&SrchVer=&ChunkSize=&SDDSLOC=
&ROOTDIR=CII/&RESULTTEMPLATE=CII/CII_PICK&ARRAY_PICK=1&SDDSID=&SDDSDESC=
(subscription required)

Fig. 13 – Percent of Population 25-34 Years with a Post-Secondary Degree or Diploma, 2001 and 2006
The TR data is from Statistics Canada’s Education Attainment data and the U.S. Census Bureau American Community
Survey. The percentages were calculated using the population numbers from Fig. 1.
Sources
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&_submenuId=datasets_2&_lang=enEleva
tors
B15001. SEX BY AGE BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR THE POPULATION 18 YEARS AND OVER - Universe:
POPULATION 18 YEARS AND OVER
B15002. SEX BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR THE POPULATION 25 YEARS AND OVER - Universe: POPULATION 25
YEARS AND OVER
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/topics/RetrieveProductTable.cfm?TPL=RETR&ALEVEL=3&APATH=3&C
ATNO=&DETAIL=0&DIM=&DS=99&FL=0&FREE=0&GAL=0&GC=99&GK=NA&GRP=1&IPS=&METH=0&ORDER=1&PID=9
3609&PTYPE=88971&RL=0&S=1&ShowAll=No&StartRow=1&SUB=0&Temporal=2006&Theme=75&VID=0&VNAMEE=&V
NAMEF=

Fig. 14 – Percent of Population Aged 25-34 with a Post-Graduate or Professional Degree, 2001 and 2006
The data is from Statistics Canada and the U.S. Census. Bureau. The percentages were calculated using the population
numbers from Fig. 1. Professional degrees include medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine and optometry.
Sources
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&_submenuId=datasets_2&_lang=enEleva
tors

49

B15001. SEX BY AGE BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR THE POPULATION 18 YEARS AND OVER - Universe:
POPULATION 18 YEARS AND OVER
B15002. SEX BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT FOR THE POPULATION 25 YEARS AND OVER - Universe: POPULATION 25
YEARS AND OVER
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/topics/RetrieveProductTable.cfm?TPL=RETR&ALEVEL=3&APATH=3&C
ATNO=&DETAIL=0&DIM=&DS=99&FL=0&FREE=0&GAL=0&GC=99&GK=NA&GRP=1&IPS=&METH=0&ORDER=1&PID=9
3609&PTYPE=88971&RL=0&S=1&ShowAll=No&StartRow=1&SUB=0&Temporal=2006&Theme=75&VID=0&VNAMEE=&V
NAMEF=

Fig. 15 – Percent of Population 25-34 Years with a Post-Secondary Degree or Diploma, 2001 and 2006
All of the data was obtained from Common University Data Ontario (CUDO).
Source
Toronto Region:
http://www.cou.on.ca/_bin/relatedSites/cudo.cfm

Fig. 16 – Business, Science and Technology, and Other Education Degrees Awarded in the Toronto Region, 2006-2007
Academic Year
All of the data was obtained from Common University Data Ontario (CUDO).
Source
Toronto Region:
http://www.cou.on.ca/_bin/relatedSites/cudo.cfm

Fig. 17 – Engineering Degrees Awarded per 100,000 Population, 2002 and 2007
The data for the U.S. comparator regions was obtained from the Engineering Workforce Commission of the American
Association of Engineering Societies, Inc. (AAES) in their publication ‘Engineering & Technology Degrees’. The data for
the TR is from CUDO, and the data for Montreal was obtained by contacting each University individually and obtaining
data. Totals were divided by the population numbers from Fig. 1.
Source
“Engineering & Technology Degrees” (publication purchased from the AAES)
Toronto Region:
CUDO (Common University Data Ontario) http://www.cou.on.ca/_bin/relatedSites/cudo.cfm

Fig. 18 – NSERC Collaborative Research and Development Project Funding in the Toronto Region, 1997-2008
(Constant 2006 CAD)
The data was obtained from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) published grant reports
and the NSERC searchable database. It was then summed for each year.
Sources
Toronto Region 2007:
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_oct-dec-07_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_july-sept2007_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_reports_apr-july2007_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_jan-mar2007_e.pdf

50

Toronto Region prior to 2007:
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/stats/2004-2005/en/tables/FF04-05E.xls

Fig. 19 – Federal Government R&D Funding to Research Institutions, per capita, 2000-2007, Constant 2006 USD
The data for the TR and Montreal was obtained from NSERC, the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR), the
Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). The data
for the US comparators was obtained from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health
(NIH). The values were converted to standard 2006 dollars. The data for the TR and Montreal was then converted to
2006 USD using the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Sources
Toronto Region & Montreal:
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_oct-dec-07_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_july-sept2007_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_reports_apr-july2007_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/disclosure_grants/grants_report_jan-mar2007_e.pdf
http://www.nserc.gc.ca/about/stats/2004-2005/en/tables/FF04-05E.xls
http://webapps.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/funding/Search?p_language=E&p_version=CIHR
http://www.outil.ost.uqam.ca/CRSH/RechProj.aspx?vLangue=Anglais or
http://www.sshrc.ca/web/about/stats/tables_e.asp
http://www.innovation.ca/projects/CFIawards100608.xls
http://report.nih.gov/award/trends/State_Congressional/StateOverview.cfm
http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/tab.do?dispatch=4

Fig. 20 – Private R&D expenditure per $1000 USD sales per 100,000 people, 2007
The data was purchased from Standard & Poor’s Compustat. Then total R&D expenditure for each comparator and the
Toronto Region was divided into the total sales. This number was then multiplied by 1000 to give the R&D expenditure
per $1000 in sales figure. Finally, this number was divided by the total population for each region, and then multiplied
by 100 000 which gives the private R&D expenditure per $1000 sales per 100 000 people.
Source
www.compustat.com (private purchased data from compustat)

Fig. 21 – Number of Scientific Publications by Authors at Toronto Region Universities, 2000-2006
The data was purchased from the Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques (OST).
Source
OST - Patents and Publications - TR, MTL, SV, RT, MA, MI, IL - 2000-2006 (private purchased data)

Fig. 22 – Number of Scientific Publications per 100,000 Population, 2000-2006
Source

51

Fig. 23 – Average Relative Impact Factors (ARIF) of Publications 2000-2006
Source
OST - Patents and Publications – TR, MTL, SV, RT, MA, MI, IL - 2000-2006 (private purchased data)

Fig. 24 – Average Relative Citations (ARC), 2000-2006
Source

Fig. 25 – Total Licenses, Patents (Applications and Issued), and Invention Disclosures, Universities and Hospitals per
100 000 Population, 2001 and 2006
The data is from the Association of University Technology Mangers (AUTM) Licensing Survey. The universities and
institutions belonging to each region were identified and their data was summed.
Source
2006 Licensing Survey- http://www.autm.net/about/dsp.pubDetail2.cfm?pid=41

52

INTRODUCTION
The Toronto Region benefits from a diverse economy with
expertise and strength in a wide range of economic sectors.
Within this broad range of industries, the Toronto Region is
home to numerous world-ranked clusters of R&D.
The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) worked with TRRA to
determine where the region’s research and development
strengths lie. This effort identified over 30 research-intensive
APPENDIX 3 – SELECTED SECTOR PROFILES

clusters in which the Toronto Region has developed a critical
mass of research, development and business capacity. The top
R&D clusters are defined using six key attributes: specialized
labour, anchor companies, leading customers, suppliers and
infrastructure, public sector R&D, and supportive public policies.
In this section, we profile two research-intensive clusters – Water
Technologies and Risk, Fraud, IT Security & Cryptography – which
are both topical and pertinent to the regional economy. Public
health issues and growing scientific interest in the environment,
coupled with the Toronto Region’s proximity to the Great Lakes,
have resulted in a high concentration of water-related research
and business activity in the region. The Toronto Region is the
second largest financial services centre in North America and
also is home to several universities with exceptionally strong
computer science, engineering and mathematical expertise and
programs. It is not surprising, therefore, that a vibrant Risk,
Fraud, IT Security and Cryptography cluster has emerged.

53

THE TORONTO REGION IS…. • Producing a growing highly-educated and highly skilled
workforce in this field:
• The site of a strong Fraud, Risk, IT Security &
Cryptography cluster, and which provides important – 11,200 university graduates (all levels) in computer
support to the region’s financial services sector science, physical science, engineering and
(This cluster is the second largest financial centre mathematics in 2006, 18% more than in 2005
in North America) – 2,225 technology graduates from colleges/institutes
• A growing hub of more than 100 companies that provide of technology in 2006, 70% more than in 2005
IT security products and services, including industry
leaders such as: Bioscript, Certicom Co., Cisco Systems
Canada, Digital Cement, Diversinet, IBM Canada, L-1 Growing Number Of Graduates, 2005-2006
Identity Solutions, Lorex technology Inc., McAfee
Canada, Microsoft Canada, Open Text Corporation,
Pharma Algorithms, Route1 Inc., SAP Canada,
Symantec Canada, Teranet,Thomson Reuters, and
Visual Defence
• The location of a sophisticated customer base that
includes major financial institutions (e.g., Royal Bank of
Canada, Manulife Financial, and Toronto Stock Exchange),
COMPUTER FRAUD, RISK, IT SECURITY & CRYPTOGRAPHY

and corporations such as Pitney Bowes, Alcatel-Lucent,
Research in Motion, Xerox Canada, and COM DEV
IN THE TORONTO REGION

• Home to the University of Toronto and the University of
Waterloo which are ranked among the top 10
universities in North America to publish articles related

WORLD CLASS INDEPENDENT RESEARCH
to IT security and cryptography

AND EDUCATION
Top 10 Publishers (North America) on Computer Fraud,
Risk and Security and Cryptography by University from
2000-2007
– Dan Fortin, President,

• Toronto Region universities are a hub of research
IBM Canada Ltd.

excellence recognized by the National Science and
Engineering Research Council (NSERC):
Harvard University 213
University of Texas 182

– $1.7 million (40% of all NSERC funding in 2006/07)
Institution Number of publications

went to the Toronto Region
Stanford University 157
4.6% COMPUTER ENGINEERING

University of Washington 132
11.6% COMPUTER SCIENCE

University of Toronto 116

NSERC Funding* for IT Security and
University of Waterloo 115
31.0% MATHEMATICS

Cryptography, Canada, 2007
University of California,

40%
Los Angeles 114
Columbia University 113
“The Toronto Region is home to one of the

60%
Toronto
University of Maryland 113

Region
largest and most productive concentrations

University of Wisconsin 113

Rest of
of research and development talent in the

Canada
world, and serves as a portal to all of North
America’s major markets and institutions.”

Source: ISI $1.7M
CDN

* Includes all grant and scholarship programs

54

WORLD CLASS INDEPENDENT RESEARCH
AND EDUCATION (CONTINUED)
– 24 of 41 (59%) Canada Research Chairs and NSERC
Researchers in Cryptography
• Institute for Quantum Computing

– 30 of 98 (31%) Canada Research Chairs and NSERC
• Canadian Centre of Arts and Technology
University of Waterloo

Researchers in IT Security
• Centre for Applied Cryptographic Research

– 7 of 19 (37%) Canada Research Chairs in
• Institute for Computer Research

Computer Security
• Centre for Computational Mathematics in Industry

• Toronto Region produces almost half of all IT security
and Commerce

and cryptography publications originating from
• GigatoNanoelectronics (G2N) Centre

Canadian universities, and 30% of all citations
• Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI)

• Over 40 computer science, engineering and
mathematics programs are offered at Toronto Region
universities and colleges/institutes
• Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences
• Centre for Applied Power Electronics

• Independent research institutes include: Perimeter

Institute for Theoretical Physics and Guelph-Waterloo
• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Centre

Physics Institute
• Testbed; Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
• Emerging Communications Technology Institute
• Knowledge Media and Design Institute
• Nortel Institute for Telecommunications
• Bell University Labs
• Ontario Network on the Regional Innovation System

• Centre for Emerging Device Technologies
• Centre for the Effective Design of Structures
McMaster University

• Rogers Communication Centre
• Institute for Innovation and Technology
Ryerson University

• Management (IITM)
– Bill Gates, Founder and Chairman,
Microsoft Inc.

• Hacker Lab
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
“…So just in terms of scale...and focus on
computer science, Waterloo stands out,
even on a global basis stands out very, very
well…There are many years where Waterloo
is the university we hired the most people
from of any in the world, and Waterloo has
always been in the top five every year…”


55

THE TORONTO REGION IS….. – University of Guelph: Canada Research Chair in Water
Security Supply; Guelph Water Management Group;
• Located on the shores of the Great Lakes – the world’s Groundwater Contamination; Integrated Watershed
largest fresh water source Management
• Home to over 400 companies providing water-related – McMaster University: Water Resources and
products and services, including globally-recognized Hydrologic Modeling Laboratory; United Nations
companies such as: GE Water & Processes University International Network on Water,
Technologies (Zenon International); Pipeline Inspection Environment and Health; Groundwater
Company; Pathogen Detection Systems; Enwave Energy

WORLD-LEADING RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
Contamination; Great Lakes; Water Resource
Corporation; Siemens Water; and Veolia Water management; Water Resource Public Policy
• A focal point for water-related research in three key
areas: drinking water, wastewater and source water
Top Talent at Toronto Region Universities

• Toronto Region universities received 30% ($11.4 million)
of National Science and Engineering Research Council
(NSERC) funding in 2006-07 for research in water-related
• Canada Research Chair in Groundwater Remediation

fields, including: drinking water, waste water and water
• Canada Research Chair in Water Quality Protection
University of Waterloo

resource management, and aquatic ecosystems and species.
WATER TECHNOLOGIES IN THE TORONTO REGION:

• Canada Research Chair in Quantitative Hydrogeology
AN IMPORTANT AND GROWING CLUSTER

NSERC Funding* for Water Research, Canada, 2007
• Canada Research Chair in Limnology (study of
inland waters)
• NSERC Industrial Research Chair in Water Treatment

Toronto 30%
Region
Rest of
• Canada Research Chair in Water Management,

70%
Canada
• Canada Research Chair in Water Supply Security
University of Guelph

• NSERC Industrial Research Chair in Groundwater
Contamination in Fractured Media
• NSERC/University of Guelph Chair in Urban Systems
Environmental Design
$11.4M

• 38% of NSERC Industrial Research Chairs are awarded
to Toronto Region researchers
• Canada Research Chair in Interfacial Technologies
(focus water purification)
* Includes all grant and scholarship programs

• Home to leading scientists and research programs:
McMaster University

• Canada Research Chair in Environment and Health

– University of Waterloo: National Science and
Engineering Research Council Industrial Research
• Canada Research Chair in Cold Regions Hydrology

Chair in Water Treatment; International Chair in
Water; University Consortium for Field Focused
• NSERC Northern Research Chair in Present and Past
Wilfrid Laurier University

Groundwater Contamination Research; Centre for
Hydro-ecology of the Mackenzie Basin Deltas,

Advancement of Trenchless Technology
– University of Toronto: National Science and
• Canada Research Chair in Environmental Interfaces

Engineering Research Council Industrial Research
and Biofilms
Ryerson University

Chair in Drinking Water; Drinking Water Research
Group; groundwater contamination;
• Canada Research Chair in Aquatic Toxicology
University of Ontario Institute of Technology

• NSERC Industrial Research Chair in Drinking
Water Research

56

BREADTH AND DEPTH OF WATER-RELATED RESEARCH IN TORONTO REGION UNIVERSITIES

WASTE WATER DRINKING WATER SOURCE WATER

Infrastructure and equipment – New Treatment Technologies to Software –
Wells, Extraction, Water deal with challenging pollutants Pollutant/Contamination
Management and Fluid Handling (e.g. pharmaceuticals, etc)
Modeling and Water Resource
Buried Infrastructure – storage Management
and distribution
Wetland Management
Maintenance, replacement and
Watershed Modeling
new build
Well Management
Advanced Materials – membranes,
removal technologies Transportation Impact – shipping,
roadway runoff, etc.

Advanced Materials – membranes, absorption technologies
Emission Reduction – GHG and Odour
Energy Conservation and Efficiency

Sensor / Detector Technology
Energy from waste biomass
Biotechnology – pollutants, treatments,
groundwater remediation
11 Canada Research Chairs
5 NSERC Industrial Research Chairs


57

AAES American Association of Engineering Societies
ADMI Advanced Design and Manufacturing Institute
ATRIG Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge
AUTM The Association of University Technology Managers
CCR Centre for the Commercialization of Research
CECRs Centres of Excellence for Commercialization and Research
CFI Canada Foundation for Innovation
CIHR Canadian Institutes of Health Research
CMA Census Metropolitan Area
CRD Collaborative Research and Development
CUDO Common University Data Ontario
FCC Federal Communications Commission
LC Location Quotient
MA Index Index of the Massachusetts Innovation Economy
MTC Massachusetts Technology Collaborative
APPENDIX 4 – LIST OF ACRONYMS

NIH National Institutes of Health
NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
NSF National Science Foundation
OCE Ontario Centres of Excellence
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OST Observatoire des sciences et des technologies
R&D Research and Development
SBIR Small Business Innovation on Research
SSHRC Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
Stats Canada Statistics Canada
STTR Small Business Technology Transfer

GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS
TRIEC Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council
TRRA Toronto Region Research Alliance

TR Toronto Region
MTL Montreal
RT Research Triangle
SV Silicon Valley
IL State of Illinois
MA State of Massachusetts
MI State of Michigan

58

The Conference Board of Canada, “Innovation Overview,”
http://sso.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/overview/innovation-overview.aspx
The Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, Missing 0pportunities: Ontario’s urban prosperity gap (Toronto:
Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, 2003), p.26, www.competeprosper.ca/images/uploads/wp03.pdf
The Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, Prosperity, Inequality and Poverty (Toronto: Institute for
Competitiveness and Prosperity, 2007), p.36, www.competeprosper.ca/download.php?file=WP10.pdf
See note 2.
Statistics Canada, Canada’s Changing Labour Force, 2006 Census (Ottawa: Statistics Canada., 2008), p.30,
www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/analysis/labour/pdf/97-559-XIE2006001.pdf
1

Statistics Canada, The Immigrant Labour Force Analysis Series: The Canadian Immigrant Labour Market in 2007.
(Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2008), p.8, www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/71-606-XIE/71-606-XIE2008003.pdf
2

Larry Swanson, “Montana on the Move: Summary of Statewide Roundtable 2004, March 6,”
www.crmw.org/MontanaOnTheMove/data/March_6_Summary.pdf
3

See note 2.
Brian Knudsen et al., Urban Density, Creativity, and Innovation, (Creative Class, 2007), p.9,
4

www.creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/articles/Urban_Density_Creativity_and_Innovation.pdf
5

See note 2 at p.27.
Garnett Picot and Arthur Sweetman quoted in The Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity see note 2 at p.37.
6

The Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, Reinventing Innovation and Commercialization Policy in Ontario,
ENDNOTES

(Toronto: Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, 2004), p.40, http://204.15.35.174/images/uploads/wp06.pdf
7

USA Study Guide, “Choosing a School: Choosing universities, schools, and colleges for international students,”
www.usastudyguide.com/choosingschool.htm
8

Ibid.
9

U.S. Department of Education, “USNEI: Accreditation and Quality Assurance,”
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-accreditation.html
10

Michael McKenzie, Science and Engineering PhDs: A Canadian Portrait (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2007), p.3,
11

www.statcan.ca/english/research/11-621-MIE/11-621-MIE2007063.pdf
12

Ibid., at p.4.
The Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, Reinventing Innovation and Commercialization Policy in Ontario
13

(Toronto: Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity, 2004), p.30, http://204.15.35.174/images/uploads/wp06.pdf
Desmond Beckstead, W. Mark Brown and Guy Gellatly, Cities and Growth: The Left Brain of North American Cities:
14

Scientists and Engineers and Urban Growth (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2008), p.8,
15

www.statcan.ca/english/research/11-622-MIE/11-622-MIE2008017.pdf
David A. Wolfe, Knowledge and Innovation: A Discussion Paper (Ontario, 2006), p.23,
16

www.utoronto.ca/onris/research_review/WorkingPapers/WorkingDOCS/Working06/Wolfe06_Discussion.pdf
See note 19 at p.32.
17

Maryann P. Feldman and Ian Stewart, Knowledge transfer and innovation: a review of the policy relevant literature
18

(Ontario, 2006), p.40
Ibid., at p.2.
19

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, “About NSERC,” www.nserc.gc.ca/about/about_e.asp
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, “Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) Grants,”
www.nserc.gc.ca/partners/indust/prog_profile_e.asp?pro=005
20

Alice Lam, “Work Roles and Careers of R&D Scientists in Network Organizations,” Industrial Relations, 44, no. 2
(2005), 242-275, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=684328
21

22

23

24

25

26

59

The National Academies, “Industry-University Research Partnerships: What Are the Limits of Intimacy?,”
www7.nationalacademies.org/guirr/Industry_University_Partnerships_Limits.html
See note 20 at p.24.
Roger L. Martin and James B. Milway, Strengthening management for prosperity (Toronto: Institute for
Competitiveness and Prosperity, 2007), p.3,
www.competeprosper.ca/images/uploads/ManagementPaper_May07.pdf
Ibid., at p.5.
Allison Bramwell and David A. Wolfe, “Universities and Regional Economic Development: The Entrepreneurial
University of Waterloo” Research Policy (submitted).
27

www.utoronto.ca/progris/pdf_files/UW%20and%20Regional%20Economic%20Development_rev15Feb06.pdf
Richard K. Lester, Universities, Innovation, and the Competitiveness of Local Economies: summary report from the
local innovation project (Massachusetts: Industrial Performance Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
28

2005), p.30, http://web.mit.edu/ipc/publications/pdf/05-010.pdf
29

Ibid., at p.3.
Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation, “Investing in the Jobs of the Future: $165-Million Fund To Attract
30

Investment In High-Growth Companies,” www.mri.gov.on.ca/english/news/VCF111407.asp
31

Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation, “$205 million investment fund to grow jobs of the future: McGuinty
Government Partners with Top Investors To Launch Ontario Venture Capital Fund,”
www.mri.gov.on.ca/english/news/VClaunch061108.asp
“Ontario unveils $205-million venture fund,” The Ottawa Citizen, June 12, 2008.
32

www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/bustech/story.html?id=5d015260-9069-447d-9d0e-a5eb5e9709f6
U.S. Small Business Administration, “SBIR and STTR Programs and Awards,” www.sba.gov/SBIR/indexsbir-sttr.html
33

Networks of Centres of Excellence, “CCR – Centre for the Commercialization of Research,” www.nce-
34

rce.gc.ca/cecrs/ccr_e.htm
Statistics Canada, Population and dwelling counts, for census metropolitan areas and census agglomerations, 2006
35

and 2001 censuses. www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/popdwell/Table.cfm?T=201&S=3&O=D&RPP=150
Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal, “Gross Domestic Product (GDP) 2007,”
www.tableaudebordmontreal.com/indicateurs/activiteeconomique/pib.en.html
36

Ministère des Finances Québec. Economic and Financial Profile of Québec 2008 (Québec: Ministère des Finances,
2008), p. 4-5, www.finances.gouv.qc.ca/documents/autres/en/AUTEN_profil2008.pdf
37

Investissement Québec, “Canadian Space Agency”. www.investquebec.com/en/index.aspx?page=1821#1
38

National Research Council Canada, “NRC Biotechnology Research Institute,” www.irb-bri.cnrc-
nrc.gc.ca/home/index_e.html
39

Ministère des Finances Québec. Economic and Financial Profile of Québec 2006 (Québec: Ministère des Finances,
2006), p.5, www.finances.gouv.qc.ca/documents/Autres/en/pfq_2006.pdf
40

Montreal International, “The College Network.,” www.montrealinternational.com/en/vivre/collegial.aspx
TRRA compilation based on U.S. Census, “Annual Population Estimates 2000 to 2007,”
41

www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-ann-est.html
The United States Conference of Mayors, “U.S. Metro economies, gross metropolitan product and housing outlook:
42

Key Findings,” www.usmayors.org/metroeconomies/0107/GMPreport_keyfindings.pdf
43

Karen Chapple et al., “Gauging Metropolitan ‘High-Tech’ and ‘I-Tech’ ", Activity Economic Development Quarterly 18,
no. 1, (2004), 10-29,
44

http://edq.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/18/1/10?ijkey=50c44cb29d68315499a2aa3771131b328064bf28&keytyp
e2=tf_ipsecsha
45

“America’s Best Colleges 2008: National Universities, Top School,”
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/t1natudoc_brief.php
46

U.S. Census, “State & Country QuickFacts: Massachusetts,” http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/25000.html
47

48

49

50

60

Government of Massachusetts, “Patrick-Murray Administration Highlights Growth In Robotics Sector,
Manufacturing,”
www.mass.gov/?pageID=elwdpressrelease&L=1&L0=Home&sid=Elwd&b=pressrelease&f=irobot&csid=Elwd
U.S. Department of Commerce, “Ocean and Coastal Management in Michigan,”
http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/mystate/mi.html
U.S. Census, “State & Country QuickFacts: Michigan,” http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26000.html
U.S. Census, “Cities & towns - Places over 100,000: 2000 to 2007,” www.census.gov/popest/cities/SUB-EST2007.html
MEDC, “Michigan: High Technology Focus,” http://ref.michigan.org/medc/hitechfocus/
Richard J. Bennof, Data Brief: R&D Spending is Highly Concentrated in a Small Number of States. (Arlington:
51

National Science Foundation, 2001) www.nsf.gov/statistics/databrf/nsf01320/sdb01320.htm
MEDC, “Growth Industries,” www.michiganadvantage.org/Targeted-Initiatives/Life-Sciences/Default.aspx
52

Ibid.
TRRA compilation based on California Department of Finance, “California County Population Estimates and
53

Components of Change by Year — July 1, 2000–2007,”
www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Estimates/E2/E-2_2000-07.php
54

“Fortune 1000,” http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/full_list/
55

2008 Index of Silicon Valley (San Jose, CA: Joint Venture, Silicon Valley Network, 2008).
56

www.jointventure.org/publicatons/index/2008Index/2008%20Silicon%20Valley%20Index.pdf
U.S. Census, “National population datasets,” www.census.gov/popest/datasets.html
57

Research Triangle Region, “Why Research Triangle Region,” www.researchtriangle.org/pages.php?page_id=2
58

“The Research Triangle Park,” www.rtp.org/main/
59

Research Triangle Region, “Why Research Triangle Region,”
www.researchtriangle.org/Why%20Research%20Triangle%20Region/
60

Research Triangle Region, “Colleges & Universities,”
www.researchtriangle.org/pages.php?page1=52&page2=79&page3=80&page_id=80
61

62

63

64

65

66


61

MaRS Centre, Heritage Building
101 College Street, Suite HL30
Toronto, ON M5G 1L7
Tel 416 673 6670
Fax 416 673 6671
Email info@trra.ca
Visit us a www.trra.ca

© 2008 Toronto Region Research Alliance

2008 Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge

More Related Content

Similar to 2008 Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge

More from Toronto Region Research Alliance

Recently uploaded

2008 Annual Toronto Region Innovation Gauge