Evaluating GE³LS Progress & Supporting Success

An international study conducted by the European Research Area on Societal Aspects of Genomics (ERASAGE) in 2006 found Canada to be a "benchmark country" with its GE³LS research programs ranking among the most "strongly developed". A commissioned Bibliometric Analysis concluded in 2008 that Canada ranks 4^th overall in GE³LS research using multi-criteria rating from 1996-2007, just behind the U.S., U.K., and Denmark, and on par with Australia.

More recently, an External Evaluation of Genome Canada conducted by KPMG in May 2009 found that Canada's leadership in GE³LS research had improved substantially since Genome Canada was created, from an average rating of "fair to good" prior to Genome Canada, to an average rating of "excellent" now. While several federal and provincial initiatives have contributed to enhancing Canada’s leadership position in the area of GE³LS, a majority of respondents believed that this change was either completely (8%), mainly (38%) or partially (23%) due to Genome Canada and the regional Genome Centres. In respect of integrated GE³LS research, the recent evaluation of Genome Canada revealed that 47% of respondents believed Canada has done this well or very well. Much of this enthusiasm can be attributed particularly to the international respondents who regarded Canada's experience with GE³LS integration as faring better than that of their own countries. International reviewers saw GE³LS integration "as a key defining characteristic of Genome Canada and very valuable". Here at home however, some GE³LS researchers do not believe their work is as well-integrated in the science as it could be, and some genomics scientists are not fully persuaded of the added value GE³LS brings. All concede, however, that when integrated GE³LS works, it works well.

Given the increased demand by governments to hold funders and researchers accountable for research funding and to demonstrate return on investments, it is critical for Genome Canada to be able to drill down at a more granular level to evaluate concrete outcomes of GE³LS research and its utility for end-users. In order to do so, it must be able, first and foremost, to identify those outcomes in a meaningful way, using appropriate performance measures well suited to the particular nature of GE³LS research and its contributory role. Such measures would be intended not only to assess the value of past work done, but also to help guide future directions and priority areas.

A first step in this direction was taken by Genome British Columbia who, in collaboration with Genome Canada, organized a Workshop in June 2009 on "Measuring Success in the Social Sciences and Humanities". The Workshop was an important opportunity to identify challenges and opportunities for measuring and valuing social sciences/humanities-type research as distinguished from the natural sciences.

Back