Thank you for the question.
I want to draw attention to the comment about where we can punch above our weight and win globally.
We are an applied research centre, Canada's largest one, when it comes to this issue, so we looked at the problem of patents. We looked at the data and we asked several questions. I'm going to try to give you some insight on where we can punch above our weight.
The first thing we did was look at the technology classes in which Canada has really strong specialization compared to the rest of the world. The policy relevance here is that consistent, strong specialization in this technology means that there's some sort of domestic factor that supports Canadian businesses.
We looked at that, and then we looked at where the technology classes in Canada have comparative advantage. A number of researchers have done this, but we overlapped the two so that we can see where Canada can punch above its weight. We analyzed that, and here are the results from that report.
Our analysis of the latest patent statistics shows an absolute advantage in nine fields, the top five being medical technology, computer technology, measurement, pharmaceuticals and transportation.
It's also important to assess the comparative advantages. Mr. Balsillie mentioned the idea that economy works on the idea of absolute advantage. This is what you get when you get critical mass, but you also have to have strong specializations in emerging areas.
We have three areas where we have the potential to punch above our weight. One of them is microstructural technology and nanotechnology, the basis for semiconductors, quantum and advanced materials like batteries. We are strong in that area, regardless of these low OECD and declining patent numbers. We have strength here.
I'll give you a sense of what strong specialization means: Canada patents three times more frequently in microstructural and nano compared to the world average, and it's almost twice as much in civil and environmental technology.
What's really important to note, as was mentioned by a previous witness, Pina D'Agostino, is that different approaches are required for each—