Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Russell Field, Associate Professor, Sport and Physical Activity, University of Manitoba

Late on an October Monday night, George Springer smashed a three-run homer to send nearly 45,000 fans in Toronto’s Rogers Centre — and a record national television audience — into a frenzy.

Six outs later, the Blue Jays had qualified for the 2025 World Series against the defending champion Los Angeles Dodgers.

It had the feeling of a denouement. Yet, like other famed home runs in Blue Jays history, Springer’s blast was just one step in the long journey through baseball’s three playoff rounds.

Edwin Encarnacion’s extra-inning walk-off homer against the Baltimore Orioles in 2016 only won an elimination wildcard game.

A year earlier, Jose Bautista’s then-audacious bat flip followed a dramatic home run — also like Springer’s hit in the seventh inning — that moved the Blue Jays onto the same championship series round that they had not won since 1993. Until this year.

The enduring legacy of 1993

Invoking 1993 holds special resonance for Blue Jays fans. It’s the last time the team won, let alone reached, the World Series.

That year produced the most dramatic home run in team history. Joe Carter’s Game 6, ninth-inning, three-run blast to left field was only the second time a World Series had ended with a walk-off home run. It clinched the team’s second straight championship.

It is easy to tell the story of the Blue Jays through the lens of dramatic game-winning home runs. However, the context of the team’s championships —and near misses — offers a more nuanced tale.

Building a contending team

Toronto, thanks to funding from Labatt Breweries, was granted an American League expansion franchise in 1977, alongside the Seattle Mariners — the team Toronto just vanquished in the championship series this year. The Mariners remain the only current franchise never to have played in a World Series.

Following a handful of dire losing seasons, Blue Jays management earned a reputation for talent development. The first crop of stars — Dave Stieb, George Bell and Tony Fernandez — won a division championship in the team’s ninth season. They fell one game short of qualifying for the World Series, losing the only seventh game in a post-season series in franchise history prior to this year.

That team played in an open-air, refurbished football stadium. Fans chilled by the cool breezes off Lake Ontario did not enjoy the irony of cheering on their brewery-owned team in a venue where beer sales were prohibited by provincial edict.

Modernity came to Toronto in 1989 when the team moved into SkyDome, a then-state-of the-art domed stadium complete with retractable roof (and by then, beer vendors) that was funded and operated by a public-private partnership.

After playoff disappointments in 1989 and 1991, that generation of Blue Jays stars broke through in 1992 to reach the World Series for the first time. Prior to the second game at Atlanta’s Fulton County Stadium, the U.S. Marine Corps colour guard walked onto the field with the Canadian flag flying upside down.

The controversy was integrated into circulating narratives that Americans did not respect Canadian teams. It is a still-perpetuated trope: the Toronto Star has spent this playoff run reporting on “what the U.S. media said” about Blue Jays’ victories, as though that matters.

The Blue Jays 2025 success — realizing the promise of a new generation of star prospects headlined by Vladimir Guererro Jr. and Bo Bichette — has rekindled memories of these past glories: the first winning teams of the 1980s, the back-to-back champions in 1992-93 and the bravado of the Bautista-Encarnacion-Josh Donaldson teams from a decade ago.

Lost in this pantheon of star players and dramatic moments, however, is the two decades of mediocrity that followed the heights of the Carter home run.

Changes in corporate ownership

The Blue Jays core aged or moved on and Labatt’s was purchased by the Belgian conglomerate, Interbrew SA.

A more dispassionate, bottom-line ownership led to teams that failed to reap the talents of Hall of Famers like Roy Halladay and major stars like Carlos Delgado and Shawn Green.

Rogers Communications purchased 80 per cent of the Blue Jays in 2000, with Interbrew retaining 20 per cent. The on-field performance changed little, but the business model evolved significantly.

Rogers acquired the remaining 20 per cent of the team in July 2004. Before the year was out, it had gained control of SkyDome for $25 million, a fraction of the $600 million that the stadium has cost to build only 15 years earlier. Now fully privately owned, it was renamed the Rogers Centre.

Today, the Blue Jays reflect the vertical integration of modern commercial sports. The team is the primary tenant in a stadium operated by their owners. Their games are broadcast on television channels, radio stations and streaming services owned and operated by Rogers Communications. These channels market other Rogers-owned content during Blue Jays games.

Meanwhile, fans consume this content on cable subscriptions and internet services that are Rogers’ core businesses. The newest extension of this revenue-generation model is the increasing prominence of sports betting, which is integrated fully into broadcasts by on-screen commentators providing odds as though delivering sports “news,” not paid advertising

Canada’s team

The production and circulation of dominant narratives is a consequence of such a structure, what sociologist David Whitson termed “circuits of promotion.”

One of the most powerful is that the support for the Blue Jays is nationwide. They are Canada’s team. There is an element of truth to this. The Blue Jays’ fan base is considerable, particularly when they are winning.

But this is also a marketing construct — one that benefits from the Blue Jays being the only remaining Canadian-based team in a U.S.-operated professional sports league. This would be a much harder narrative to sell if the Montreal Expos were not now the Washington Nationals, and it is not entirely novel.

---

Read more:
Toronto Blue Jays: Amid Canada-U.S. tensions, ‘Canada’s team’ is excelling at America’s pastime

---

Basketball’s Toronto Raptors, themselves the beneficiaries of the relocation of the Vancouver Grizzlies, capitalized on both the team’s appeal as well as its monopoly on Canadian markets with its wildly popular 2019 marketing campaign, “We The North.”

Come Friday night, when Trey Yesavage throws the first pitch of the 2025 World Series, the absence of other Canadian-based teams and the centralization of media outlets in Toronto will ensure there will be a ready (and passionate) audience across the country all ready to chant: “Let’s go, Blue Jays!”

Russell Field does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Blue Jays fever sets in as Canada readies for the World Series for the first time in 32 years – https://theconversation.com/blue-jays-fever-sets-in-as-canada-readies-for-the-world-series-for-the-first-time-in-32-years-267943

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Carolyn Yule, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Guelph

The Liberal government has introduced bail reform legislation to expand “reverse-onus” provisions in the Criminal Code, stipulating that someone accused of a crime, rather than the Crown, must demonstrate why they should be released before trial.

Bill C-14 also proposes tougher sentencing laws for serious and violent crimes.

The goal, according to Prime Minister Mark Carney, is to “keep violent and repeat offenders out of our communities.”

But will these changes effectively address concerns from some politicians, police and the public that bail is too easily granted and contributes to rising crime? Probably not. They are symbolic responses unlikely to satisfy critics or address the root causes of crime.

Bail decisions are challenging

Bail laws are designed to strike a balance between protecting public safety and upholding the rights of people who are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Under the Criminal Code, there is a presumption that an accused person should be released with as few conditions as necessary. But bail can be denied if the person is unlikely to attend trial, poses a threat to public safety or if their release would undermine confidence in the legal system.

The law provides some limited guidance, requiring courts to consider factors such as an accused’s past convictions for violence and the circumstances of Indigenous or otherwise vulnerable or marginalized people. Appellate court decisions provide further direction.

Bail decisions are inherently discretionary. Judges and justices of the peace must already weigh factors like risk, criminal history and the nature of the offence to determine if an accused can be safely released. Given the nature of bail decisions, more reverse-onus provisions are unlikely to substantively change bail outcomes.

A dearth of reliable information

Bail reform should be driven by evidence to ensure policy changes are effective and accountable. Yet the biggest barrier to evaluating the bail system is a lack of reliable information. We know little about:

1. How many people are released;

2. Under what conditions they are released;

3. How often accused who are released on bail reoffend.

The few studies available suggest bail courts are handling more cases and are doing so more slowly, but relatively few people are denied bail.

Little data exists that explain what factors shape bail outcomes. Information that is available suggests those charged with a prior criminal history, and a history of failing to appear in court or comply with release conditions, are more likely to be denied bail.

A review of bail decisions for 2022-23 by the BC Prosecution Service in British Columbia revealed that detention rates were slightly higher than average when there was a violent offence involved (between 10 to 13 per cent) and notably higher where there was a violent offence and breach of conditions (between 17 and 24 per cent).

According to a report from the Toronto Police Service, seven out of the of 44 gun-related homicides in 2022 (16 per cent) were allegedly committed by people on bail. The Alberta government reported that 27.9 per cent of adults under bail supervision between 2021 and 2022 were admitted to remand custody at least once due to violating bail conditions and/or incurring new charges; however, no other contextual data is provided.

A 2013 study prepared for Canada’s justice department found that 51 of 291 people from two locations violated the terms of their bail release — and the vast majority were for breaching conditions or failing to attend court rather than new offences.

Balancing enforcement with support

While the scant data available do not support the belief that the current system releases all offenders who then go on to commit serious crime, it’s also clear that some accused released on bail subsequently do in fact reoffend — a fact acknowledged by bail supervisors.

But Canada cannot arrest its way to safer communities. A recent report, Finding Common Ground, found that police, lawyers and service providers are aligned on the need for both better supervision of high-risk individuals and greater investment in social supports as top priorities for improving bail.

A recent poll also suggests many Canadians are open to balanced, long-term solutions that combine accountability with social investment, recognizing that real safety comes not from quick fixes but from a more responsive and supportive system.

The Liberal government has also acknowledged the need to invest in community-based supports as part of broader bail reform efforts.

---

Read more:
Race is closely tied to who gets bail — that’s why we must tread carefully on bail reform

---

5 ways to strengthen the bail system

We offer concrete solutions that will enhance fairness, public safety and democratic accountability:

1. A more detailed set of guidelines in the Criminal Code — passed by elected parliamentarians — to make bail determinations. These changes may largely codify existing considerations but could be used to adjust the bail calculus, including de-emphasizing more minor breaches and emphasizing the need to address repeat offending.

2. More social service provisions are needed, particularly in terms of housing. Allowing people to remain in the community and possibly maintain familial and employment connections is more cost-effective and better for public safety than jail time.

3. Better tracking and monitoring of people on bail — including electronic monitoring and improved information processing and communication — can help ensure compliance with conditions and reduce the risk of reoffending.

4. Better data collection on the bail process and outcomes can inform policy reforms and support more effective judicial decisions.

5. Improving bail court efficiency and decision-making through increased resources, information sharing and a shift in courthouse culture can help reduce delays and support more timely and effective hearings.

To build safer communities, the federal government should follow through on its commitment to invest in support services while also helping provinces better monitor and enforce bail conditions. Doing so will ease pressure on the legal system while improving outcomes for people and communities.

Carolyn Yule receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Laura MacDiarmid receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Troy Riddell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The federal government tables bail reform bill: 5 ways to strengthen Canada’s bail system – https://theconversation.com/the-federal-government-tables-bail-reform-bill-5-ways-to-strengthen-canadas-bail-system-267832

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Julien Bousquet, Full Marketing Professor, Department of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi (UQAC)

When people travel, they aren’t just looking for historic sights — they’re also looking for new flavours that captivate and connect them to the place they’re visiting.

In Québec, for example, it’s poutine. The comfort food mix of crispy fries, squeaky cheese curds and rich brown gravy was first served in 1950s-era rural snack bars before becoming a national symbol.

In Spain, paella — a saffron-infused rice dish brimming with seafood, chicken and vegetables and born in Valencia’s farmlands as a shared workers’ meal — is a must-have.

In Japan, ramen — steaming bowls of wheat noodles in a fragrant broth layered with soy, miso or pork bones — tells the story of post-Second World War solace and culinary innovation.

But beyond the flavours of food, can gastronomy become a language of identity and cultural diplomacy? That question is at the heart of Canada’s growing culinary movement.

Gastronomy as a form of diplomacy

Across Canada, food is fast becoming a marker of identity and regional pride. From the Okanagan Valley vineyards to Québec’s sugar shacks, cuisine is emerging as a language that defines who Canadians are — and how the world perceives them.

This movement is gaining traction as Kelowna, British Columbia recently accepted the invitation to apply for the designation of UNESCO City of Gastronomy
— a title that celebrates places where food culture drives creativity, sustainability and community.

Created in 2004, UNESCO’s Creative Cities Network recognizes and honours cities where food culture drives innovation and community well-being. Today, 57 cities hold the designation, from Parma, Italy and Chengdu, China, to Tucson, Arizona, in the United States.

Canada has yet to join their ranks, which is why Kelowna’s candidacy matters: it would be the country’s first City of Gastronomy, reflecting its mix of Indigenous heritage, wine culture and farm-to-table creativity.

As tourism continues to recover and regions compete for distinctiveness, gastronomy has become a form of soft power — a country’s ability to influence others through culture, values and attraction rather than force, shaping how nations are perceived and how travellers connect emotionally with a place.

Studies show that food tourism has become a key driver of regional development and destination appeal. The signature dish — an emblematic creation tied to a chef, region or tradition — offers a concrete way to translate culinary creativity into cultural identity.

How food turns travel into brand

Some dishes function like culinary logos, expressing the personality of a place or a chef while creating lasting memories. Research reveals that for travellers, food becomes participation rather than consumption — a way to experience a place rather than just observe it.

A memorable meal merges creativity, heritage and place. In Canada, such dishes also act as experiential anchors that link ingredients, landscapes and emotion — from a buttery Halifax lobster roll that tastes of the Atlantic coast to a sweet, purple Saskatoon berry pie that evokes the Prairie harvest.

Yet some critics warn that the growing wave of gastronomic branding risks slipping into what they call culinary gentrification — when local traditions are polished and packaged for tourists, sometimes at the expense of the communities that created them.

The challenge for cities like Kelowna will be to celebrate their culinary identity without turning authenticity into a marketing slogan.

Canada’s regions tell their stories through food

Research on food, culture and sustainability shows how such connections help regions build distinctive, resilient identities.

In Québec, for example, food is deeply woven with cultural pride. From sugar shacks in the Laurentians and Beauce countryside to Montréal’s multicultural fine dining scene, tradition and innovation intermingle — but Québec is far from the only province where culinary identity thrives.

On Prince Edward Island, the Fall Flavours Food and Drink Festival — running from early September to mid-October — brings together chefs, farmers and fishers to celebrate the island’s harvest. Events take place in small towns and coastal villages, turning the island into one big dining room. The festival strengthens local pride, supports producers and extends the tourist season beyond summer.

In Alberta, Alberta Food Tours invite travellers to discover rural producers, Indigenous culinary traditions and farmers markets across the province, from Calgary to Jasper. These guided experiences highlight the province’s agricultural roots while promoting sustainability and community connection.

In B.C., the Okanagan Valley, where Kelowna is located, has become a leading example of farm-to-table and wine tourism in Canada. Stretching from Vernon to Osoyoos, its vineyards and orchards supply local chefs who turn seasonal produce into creative menus. Culinary trails and wine festivals connect visitors with growers and winemakers, while Kelowna’s bid to become a UNESCO City of Gastronomy reflects the region’s growing reputation for sustainable, community-driven gastronomy.

As food tourism continues to grow, however, authentic experiences become harder to find. In 2024, it was valued at roughly US$1.8 billion globally. By 2033, that figure is expected to reach almost US$8 billion, growing at an average rate of about 18 per cent a year.

Tourists crave “the real deal,” yet their expectations often reshape what’s served. For example, traditional dishes may be simplified, sweetened or made less spicy to suit visitors’ palates. Authenticity, it appears, is less a fixed ideal than a dialogue between chefs, consumers and the media.

Why does the heritage of gastronomy matter?

Signature dishes remind us that identity isn’t inherited — it’s created and shared. Local cuisine connects people to place, turns ingredients into stories and makes culture tangible.

When cities launch food festivals, culinary routes or UNESCO designation bids, they’re not just promoting restaurants, they’re defining who they are as a country.

In a world often divided, food remains a universal language. Local gastronomy reminds us that what’s on our plate is never just about flavour, it’s about belonging.

Julien Bousquet does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How gastronomy tourism evolved into international identity and cultural diplomacy – https://theconversation.com/how-gastronomy-tourism-evolved-into-international-identity-and-cultural-diplomacy-267188

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Deaville, Professor of Music, Carleton University

This story contains spoilers about the movie ‘Weapons.’

As we approach the scariest time of year, we need to make sure our home screens are in good working order for horror films, in particular the volume control.

It’s true that some effects of the horror genre are based on sounds that are popularly linked to danger — but let’s not forget the contrasting silences that are necessary for jump scares to have their full impact.

It’s not just in feature films where the sonic device of “un-sound” works: horror trailers are filled with unexpected crashes out of stillness and all-too-brief fragments that beg questions.

Skilled directors and sound designers can frighten us in myriad ways, and sometimes through less in this all-too-noisy world.

Space and emptiness

In this year’s contender for best horror picture, Weapons, director Zach Cregger wanted the sound team to adopt an understated approach to express a “sense of space and emptiness” for the movie’s locations.

He nevertheless deploys jump scares of varying intensity in diverse contexts, several of them involving the sudden appearance of the head of the witch Aunt Gladys (Amy Madigan).

Most deliver quick, unexpected frights, but one represents the classic horror slow burn, as teacher Justine Gandy (Julia Garner) walks around a seemingly deserted house to the accompaniment of cicadas.

In the words of Cregger, the cicadas “become the score,” their constant droning calming and unsettling us as we look through the window with Justine. We share her shock when we realize that there are two immobile figures sitting inside. Terror is conjured out of stillness.

‘A Quiet Place’

Weapons and other releases this past year continued the practice of crafting horror scenarios out of silence.

The A Quiet Place franchise, starting with the 2018 film which invoked the terror of alien invasion, helped to put horror silence on the map.

The 2018 film, with little verbal dialogue and a central Deaf character, also challenged the long eugenicist association of disability with monstrosity — often fashioned with what my scholarship has called “the moaning of unlife.”

---

Read more:
The uneasy history of horror films and disability

---

Horror silences were similarly essential to conjure the strangeness and weirdness of grief and hauntings in another 2018 film, Hereditary. The film’s sound designer, Asbjoern Andersen, has remarked “it’s the quiet ones you have to look out for,” a dictum that he brought to life through long pauses in dialogue, low and brooding music and threatening atmospheres of indistinct sounds.

The same holds true for the sonic environment of the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House (also 2018), where sound editor Trevor Gates was able to create atmospheres to convey isolation and discover novel ways to “hold a silence.”

In such contexts, absolute silence is not necessary — any kind of low-end drone or soft, repetitive sound like a ticking clock or a babbling brook could lull audiences into a false sense of security.

Crashes out of stillness

Prior to these recent productions, masterful directors and sound designers crafted dread and psychological depth and viscerality partly through silence.

According to film specialists, the first classic jump scare occurred in the 1942 movie Cat People when producer Val Lewton, director Jacques Tourneur and film editor Mark Robson created a scene that involved a woman walking alone to a bus stop, her rising dread of being followed giving way to a sudden, explosive bus entrance.

This type of scene became known as the Lewton Bus: a gradual buildup followed by a sudden shock through misdirection and a sharp sonic jolt. The practice would become a commonplace in the producer’s later work.

Lulled into complicity

This sharp sonic jolt soundtrack device just needed the touch of director Alfred Hitchcock to become iconic in the famous shower scene of Psycho(1960).

Commentators — both academic and popular — frequently reference composer and film scorer Bernard Herrmann’s screeching string sound as the brilliant sonic representation of the stabbing knife.

Yet they typically pass over what makes the scene’s explosive violence so unexpected and visceral: the constant sound of the shower water that — like silence — lulls the audience (and victim) into complacency.

Hitchcock knew how to strategically mobilize stillness to make threats more tangible, like in the drawn out and famous crop-duster scene of North by Northwest (1959).

In Hitchcock’s wake, notable examples occur in Steven Spielberg’s Jaws from 1975 (especially the shark’s first closeup), at key moments in John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978), and — much later — in the notorious diner scene from David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive (2001).

The psychology of fear

These and other directors have understood how to exploit the psychology of fear to evoke startled responses of terror among audiences.

The jump scare and related fright-inducing sonic scenarios would become parodied in Scream and the Scary Movie series (2000-13), for example, where false (“cat”) scares subvert horror/slasher traditions.

This Halloween season, if you watch horror and suspenseful films, I encourage you to pay attention to the silence of the frames.

James Deaville does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Creepy cicadas, ticking clocks and jump scares: How frightful films conjure terror out of quiet – https://theconversation.com/creepy-cicadas-ticking-clocks-and-jump-scares-how-frightful-films-conjure-terror-out-of-quiet-266750

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ajay Kumar Shrestha, Professor, Computer Science, Vancouver Island University

Artificial intelligence is now part of everyday life. It’s in our phones, schools and homes. For young people, AI shapes how they learn, connect and express themselves. But it also raises real concerns about privacy, fairness and control.

AI systems often promise personalization and convenience. But behind the scenes, they collect vast amounts of personal data, make predictions and influence behaviour, without clear rules or consent.

This is especially troubling for youth, who are often left out of conversations about how AI systems are built and governed.

Concerns about privacy

My research team conducted national research and heard from youth aged 16 to 19 who use AI daily – on social media, in classrooms and in online games.

They told us they want the benefits of AI, but not at the cost of their privacy. While they value tailored content and smart recommendations, they feel uneasy about what happens to their data.

Many expressed concern about who owns their information, how it is used and whether they can ever take it back. They are frustrated by long privacy policies, hidden settings and the sense that you need to be a tech expert just to protect yourself.

As one participant said:

“I am mainly concerned about what data is being taken and how it is used. We often aren’t informed clearly.”

Uncomfortable sharing their data

Young people were the most uncomfortable group when it came to sharing personal data with AI. Even when they got something in return, like convenience or customization, they didn’t trust what would happen next. Many worried about being watched, tracked or categorized in ways they can’t see.

This goes beyond technical risks. It’s about how it feels to be constantly analyzed and predicted by systems you can’t question or understand.

AI doesn’t just collect data, it draws conclusions, shapes online experiences, and influences choices. That can feel like manipulation.

Parents and teachers are concerned

Adults (educators and parents) in our study shared similar concerns. They want better safeguards and stronger rules.

But many admitted they struggle to keep up with how fast AI is moving. They often don’t feel confident helping youth make smart choices about data and privacy.

Some saw this as a gap in digital education. Others pointed to the need for plain-language explanations and more transparency from the tech companies that build and deploy AI systems.

Professionals focus on tools, not people

The study found AI professionals approach these challenges differently. They think about privacy in technical terms such as encryption, data minimization and compliance.

While these are important, they don’t always align with what youth and educators care about: trust, control and the right to understand what’s going on.

Companies often see privacy as a trade-off for innovation. They value efficiency and performance and tend to trust technical solutions over user input. That can leave out key concerns from the people most affected, especially young users.

Power and control lie elsewhere

AI professionals, parents and educators influence how AI is used. But the biggest decisions happen elsewhere. Powerful tech companies design most digital platforms and decide what data is collected, how systems work and what choices users see.

Even when professional push for safer practices, they work within systems they did not build. Weak privacy laws and limited enforcement mean that control over data and design stays with a few companies.

This makes transparency and holding platforms accountable even more difficult.

What’s missing? A shared understanding

Right now, youth, parents, educators and tech companies are not on the same page. Young people want control, parents want protection and professionals want scalability.

These goals often clash, and without a shared vision, privacy rules are inconsistent, hard to enforce or simply ignored.

Our research shows that ethical AI governance can’t be solved by one group alone. We need to bring youth, families, educators and experts together to shape the future of AI.

The PEA-AI model

To guide this process, we developed a framework called PEA-AI: Privacy–Ethics Alignment in Artificial Intelligence. It helps identify where values collide and how to move forward. The model highlights four key tensions:

1. Control versus trust: Youth want autonomy. Developers want reliability. We need systems that support both.

2. Transparency versus perception: What counts as “clear” to experts often feels confusing to users.

3. Parental oversight versus youth voice: Policies must balance protection with respect for youth agency.

4. Education versus awareness gaps: We can’t expect youth to make informed choices without better tools and support.

What can be done?

Our research points to six practical steps:

1. Simplify consent. Use short, visual, plain-language forms. Let youth update settings regularly.

2. Design for privacy. Minimize data collection. Make dashboards that show users what’s being stored.

3. Explain the systems. Provide clear, non-technical explanations of how AI works, especially when used in schools.

4. Hold systems accountable. Run audits, allow feedback and create ways for users to report harm.

5. Teach privacy. Bring AI literacy into classrooms. Train teachers and involve parents.

6. Share power. Include youth in tech policy decisions. Build systems with them, not just for them.

AI can be a powerful tool for learning and connection, but it must be built with care. Right now, our research suggests young people don’t feel in control of how AI sees them, uses their data or shapes their world.

Ethical AI starts with listening. If we want digital systems to be fair, safe and trusted, we must give youth a seat at the table and treat their voices as essential, not optional.

Ajay Shrestha receives funding from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC); the views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the OPC.

– ref. How to ensure youth, parents, educators and tech companies are on the same page on AI – https://theconversation.com/how-to-ensure-youth-parents-educators-and-tech-companies-are-on-the-same-page-on-ai-248265

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kealey Dube, Assistant Professor, The School of Social Work, MacEwan University

When students move from university course work to real-world applications like internships, practicums or clinical placements, it’s not just about what they know, but how they use what they know.

These experiences are often the first time students apply classroom learning in unpredictable, high-stakes environments.

For students with disabilities, that leap can be especially challenging. Structural barriers, inaccessible learning environments and past negative experiences can make these transitions harder.

Something that can help students overcome barriers is simulation-based learning — when, via role playing, students practise key skills, try out strategies and learn from mistakes without the real-world consequences. It’s an approach practised across fields like health care, business as well as social work education.

We decided to explore the use of simulations with students who experience disability-related barriers, drawing on research related to learning through simulations and students with disabilities in practicum learning.

---

Read more:
Simulations with actors prepare nurses for the demands of their profession

---

From participants to partners

We took a “students as partners” approach, which sees students as active collaborators in designing their own learning experiences.

In this case study, we sought to design simulations that were practical, empowering and suited to a neurodiverse, social work university student. We also wanted simulations that reflected his particular concerns and were grounded in his unique lived experiences.

The student had experienced barriers in a previous work-integrated learning placement. Before starting another, he needed a safer way to build confidence, practise communication and prepare for the professional environment.

A team approach

The project was collaborative. As faculty members, we worked with the social work student involved in the field education course and a theatre student hired as our partner to co-create the simulations. Other participants were from MacEwan’s access and disability resources and the Centre for Teaching and Learning.

Together, the group co-designed two tailored, realistic simulation experiences aimed at helping the social work student prepare for his upcoming practicum.

How it worked

The team met over a summer to co-design the personalized simulations:

• A workplace conversation, where the student practised setting expectations with a supervisor.

• A client-facing scenario, where he responded to a phone inquiry — something he was likely to encounter during his placement.

Each simulation followed a three-part process:

• Briefing: The student reviewed the context and goals.

• Role play: The theatre student played a realistic role based on the scenario.

• Debrief: The student watched a video of the simulation, reflected on what worked, and received supportive feedback.

By repeating the simulations multiple times, the students could build skills gradually, adjust strategies and become more confident with each try.

The theatre student also gained valuable experience learning and practising how to respond authentically and adapt during unscripted moments — skills that carry over to his own performance training.

What changed

When determining learning goals for the simulation, we focused on aligning course learning outcomes with needs specific to the social work student, such as communication skills. With each role play rotation, we captured how long it took for the social work student to clearly communicate his question or reflection to the client (played by the theatre student).

The amount of time decreased each rotation. By the end, the social work student reported he felt more confident moving through the situations. He became quicker, more confident and more comfortable with professional communication.

Most importantly, he reported feeling included and respected throughout the process. He said:

“Being involved in everything helped me feel more prepared. I made mistakes in the simulation and learned from them — so I didn’t have to make those same mistakes in real life.”

The theatre student echoed this:

“I wasn’t just acting — I was helping someone grow. It made me realize how powerful theatre can be beyond performance.”

Beyond skill development, this was capacity-building, confidence-building and community-building — all made possible by student-centred design. A year later, the student with a disability has successfully completed two field practicums and has graduated.

Why it matters

When universities design learning experiences with students, not just for them — especially students who are often left out of the process, like students facing disability-related barriers — opportunties for student engagement and empowerment are strengthened.

Simulations give students a chance to:

• Practise real-world scenarios without real-world risk.

• Learn from feedback in a supportive environment.

• Build self-advocacy and professional communication skills.

• Develop strategies that work for their unique needs.

This kind of tailored preparation can be the difference between just getting through a placement and truly thriving in it.

Looking ahead

This project shows that personalized simulations, grounded in student experiences and supported by interdisciplinary collaboration, can pave the way for more equitable, empowering education.

It suggests how when students are treated as co-creators, not just consumers or recipients of education, the learning becomes deeper, more inclusive and more meaningful. It also points to the relevance of broader use of co-created simulations across disciplines. Future possibilities include:

• Adapting simulations for group settings or online delivery.

• Partnering across departments, like theatre and business or accessibility and STEM.

• Designing for diverse learning needs from the start, using Universal Design for Learning principles.

The approach is flexible, scalable and most importantly, human-centred. Sometimes, the best way to prepare for real life is to practise it.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Through role-play learning, a neurodivergent student found work practicum success – https://theconversation.com/through-role-play-learning-a-neurodivergent-student-found-work-practicum-success-258329

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Dr. Andrea Wagner, Associate Professor, Political Science, MacEwan University

The rise of populist leaders has drawn significant attention over the past two decades. Around the world, they have reshaped politics, from Donald Trump in the United States to Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Marine Le Pen in France, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Santiago Abascal in Spain and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil.

These leaders often rise to power by promising to speak for “the people” against the established “corrupt elites.” But our recent research shows that not all populist voters want the same things.

Our study examined public opinion data from nine countries to better understand what drives support for “strongman” populist leaders. The findings reveal that there are two very different kinds of populist attitudes, and the authoritarian variety most strongly predicts whether people will support a leader who is willing to bend the rules.

Nine-country comparison

We conducted public opinion surveys in France, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Poland, Canada, the United States, Brazil and Argentina. Our Varieties of Populist Attitudes (VoPA) survey included multiple questions designed to tap into the two varieties of populism.

Respondents were asked about their trust in politicians, their support for referendums, their belief that the majority should always prevail and their preference for strong leadership — even if it means violating rules and norms — as well as their degree of nationalism.

Factor analysis confirmed that the variables associated with the above questions clustered into two distinct dimensions — anti-establishment and authoritarian populism — rather than forming a single populist attitude. This suggests that populist attitudes come in two distinct forms.

Next, we examined how each type of populist attitude predicted support for prominent populist leaders in each country who had positioned themselves as speaking on behalf of citizens against corrupt elites.

The results were striking. In most countries, including Italy, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Hungary and Poland, authoritarian populism was the strongest predictor of support for populist leaders. In other words, people who subscribed to majoritarianism, nationalism and strong leadership were most likely to back leaders willing to centralize power and challenge liberal democratic norms.

By contrast, anti-establishment populism played a weaker role, and in some countries even a negative one. In other words, citizens who simply disliked elites or wanted more direct democracy were not drawn to strongman figures. In fact, in Italy and Hungary, anti-establishment populists rejected Meloni and Orbán.

Anti-establishment populism

France and Canada stood out as exceptions. In these countries, anti-establishment populism played a more important role than authoritarianism in explaining support for populist figures like Le Pen and Pierre Poilievre.

In Canada, multiculturalism, the unpopularity of overtly anti-immigrant rhetoric and the existence of the more authoritarian People’s Party of Canada limit the appeal of strongman politics, positioning Poilievre as an anti-establishment rather than authoritarian figure.

In France, Le Pen’s focus on referendums and institutional reform, combined with the presence of Éric Zemmour as an authoritarian alternative, reinforces that her base is motivated more by democratic discontent than authoritarianism.

In the U.S., surprisingly, neither dimension significantly predicted support for Trump. This suggests that Trump’s appeal may depend more on other dynamics such as partisanship, racial and anti-immigrant attitudes or cultural identity and backlash.

These findings shed light on the different democratic implications of the two kinds of populism.

Anti-establishment populism can be understood as a demand for more responsiveness and accountability in democratic institutions. While it can disrupt existing political systems, it doesn’t necessarily threaten the basic principles of pluralism, minority rights or checks and balances. In fact, some scholars argue that this kind of populism can serve as a corrective when elites become too insulated from the public.

Why this matters for democracy

Authoritarian populism is another story. It is linked to a preference for strong leaders who are willing to bypass institutional constraints, weaken independent oversight bodies or undermine minority protections, ostensibly in the name of the people.

This kind of populism is associated with democratic backsliding of the type seen in places like Hungary and Brazil, where populist leaders have concentrated power in the executive branch and eroded liberal democratic norms.

Our research reveals that the real threat to liberal democracy comes less from people who simply dislike elites, and more from those who desire a leader they regard as tough to embody and enforce the will of the majority at the expense of minority rights.

Recognizing this difference is important when designing democratic safeguards that distinguish between legitimate demands for accountability and more direct participation or more dangerous authoritarian impulses.

---

Read more:
Do you know what populism is? Research suggests most don’t, but some view it with disdain anyway

---

Populism is not monolithic

For years, populism scholars have debated whether populism is inherently dangerous or potentially democratic.

Our findings show that both views can be correct, depending on which variety of populism is at play. Anti-establishment populism reflects widespread frustration with elites but does not automatically lead to democratic erosion. Authoritarian populism, on the other hand, is more likely to support leaders who chip away at democratic safeguards.

This reminds us that defending democracy requires more than just countering populism in general. It requires recognizing and addressing the authoritarian currents that run through some forms of populist politics.

Dr. Andrea Wagner received funding from Erasmus + Jean Monnet Chair and MacEwan University

Anna Brigevich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why some populist supporters want a strong-arm leader and others just want change – https://theconversation.com/why-some-populist-supporters-want-a-strong-arm-leader-and-others-just-want-change-266765

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Chris Hugenholtz, Professor, Geography, University of Calgary

Governments in Canada’s major oil and gas producing provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan, have touted their efforts in recent years to reduce methane emissions.

Methane is a greenhouse gas released into the atmosphere at oil and gas facilities through leaks, vents, maintenance activities and incomplete combustion. Methane traps significantly more heat than carbon dioxide, making it a potent climate pollutant.

We set out to independently verify if government claims of decreasing oil and gas methane emissions were accurate. Our new study shows that the answer is yes — but with important caveats and valuable lessons for Canada’s energy sector.

We studied satellite observations between 2019 and 2023 to understand how methane emissions rates in Canada’s main oil-producing region were changing. We focused on the heavy oil belt near Lloydminster, Alta., where a distinctive extraction method known as CHOPS (cold heavy oil production with sand) has long been associated with notable methane emissions.

CHOPS brings a mix of oil, water, sand and gas to the surface. The oil is collected, but the co-produced gas — which is mainly methane — has historically been vented or flared.

Observing emissions from space

Methane emissions can now be monitored from space, offering a powerful vantage point. Satellites can be used to independently measure and monitor emissions, helping to better understand and confirm emissions in regions where ground-based or other data are lacking.

To track changes over time, we evaluated the ratio of methane emissions to the energy produced, a measure known as emissions intensity. This metric provides an important benchmark for understanding how efficiently energy is being produced and how effectively emissions are being managed, regardless of production rates, which can change over time.

Satellites also pass over the same locations repeatedly, over days or weeks, enabling tracking of emissions over time. This can capture how emissions may be responding to policy changes, new technology or economic shifts. The large scale of satellites can average out day-to-day fluctuations from individual sites.

While satellite data provide unique coverage, they have limitations. Cloud cover, sun angle, terrain and other atmospheric or surface conditions can reduce effectiveness. In our study, we overcame these limitations with new techniques using data from the European Space Agency’s Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument aboard the Sentinel-5 Precursor satellite.

We combined those with a mass balance emissions flux model to estimate emissions from 2019 to 2023. This method was effective within the context of this study, but it may not work elsewhere, particularly where satellite observations are even more limited.

What we found was striking. Methane emissions in the Lloydminster heavy oil region declined by approximately 71 per cent between 2019 and 2023, and the intensity of methane emissions dropped by 63 per cent, reaching 0.69 gCH₄ per megajoule of energy produced.

The reasons for these reductions are likely multifaceted. Improved regulations, greater adoption of gas capture and combustion systems and enhanced operator compliance have all likely contributed to lower emissions. At the same time, a decline in oil production during portions of the study period likely played a role in driving emissions downward.

Distinguishing between efficiency-driven and production-driven reductions remains an important focus for future research, as rising production could reverse some of these gains.

These findings indicate that between 2019 to 2023, CHOPS operations are becoming less polluting and progress toward emission reductions is being achieved, even within one of Canada’s most methane-intensive oil-producing areas.

Measurement-reporting gap

Our satellite-based emissions estimates, however, were about 4.5 times higher than industry-reported values for the region. This gap underscores the flaws in traditional emissions reporting frameworks, which may not fully capture all emissions, sources or reflect real-time changes in operations.

This difference highlights the importance of independent measurement. Satellite and other measurement-based data can complement conventional reporting, providing a clearer and more dynamic picture of regional methane trends.

The study shows that substantial emissions reductions are achievable, even in mature oil fields with complex infrastructure, without fully curtailing production. This finding provides a valuable example for energy-producing regions pursuing practical pathways to decarbonization.

Reducing methane emissions

Methane is a short-lived but highly potent greenhouse gas and can trap much more heat than carbon dioxide. However, it breaks down relatively quickly in the atmosphere — around 12 years. Cutting methane emissions offers one of the fastest and most cost-effective ways to slow global warming.

Unlike many emerging climate technologies that remain costly or unproven at scale, methane mitigation can be implemented immediately using existing tools and proven methods. For example, a fraction of proposed private sector investment into expensive and highly uncertain emissions reduction technologies and projects could yield substantial and quick greenhouse gas emissions reductions from Canada’s oil and gas sector if redirected to mitigating methane.

There are benefits to industry for taking strong action on methane, including cost savings through efficiency improvements, increasing marketable gas volumes and securing access to premium markets demanding increasingly low-carbon oil and gas.

While Canada has struggled to meet its climate goals, progress is evident at the regional level. The reductions observed near Lloydminster suggest that emissions control and energy production can coexist when supported by sound policy, modern technology and transparent monitoring.

If Canada wants to achieve its commitment of cutting oil and gas methane emissions by 75 per cent by 2030 relative to 2012 levels, more independent measurement and monitoring efforts, such as those demonstrated in our study, are needed.

These are necessary to confirm whether regulations and other initiatives are delivering results, to guide future policy developments and to credibly demonstrate reductions.

Chris Hugenholtz receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. In the past, he has received funding from the oil and gas industry, but not for this project.

Coleman Vollrath receives funding from a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada CGS-D scholarship and performs occasional part-time work on methane emissions for the Pembina Institute in Calgary.

Thomas Barchyn receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. In the past, he has received funding from the oil and gas industry, but not for this project.

Zhenyu Xing does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Satellite data shows methane emissions are declining in part of Canada’s oil patch, but more monitoring is needed – https://theconversation.com/satellite-data-shows-methane-emissions-are-declining-in-part-of-canadas-oil-patch-but-more-monitoring-is-needed-265940

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Justin Vovk, Adjunct Professor. History of the Royal Family, Redeemer University

Prince Andrew has announced he will “no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.” Translation? Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title.

The decision comes as the Royal Family has faced calls to take action against Andrew over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, the notorious convicted sex offender and pedophile who died in prison in 2019.

The late Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein’s victims, accused Andrew of sexually assaulting her on three occasions when she was 17, allegations he has repeatedly denied. In 2022, she settled a civil lawsuit against him in a Manhattan court for an undisclosed amount and a charitable donation.

PR disaster

Prince Andrew’s public image imploded after his now infamous 2019 interview with BBC’s Newsnight. Speaking to host Emily Maitlis, he presented an incredulous, implausible and, at times, baffling series of denials in an attempt to clear his name of any wrongdoing toward Giuffre when she was underage.

Andrew’s statements during the interview were met with “near universal condemnation” and were a public relations disaster for the prince. He was removed from public duties four days later.

---

Read more:
A Very Royal Scandal: of all the interviews that rocked the royal family’s brand – Prince Andrew’s might just be the worst

---

Within a week, he resigned from his role as patron of more than 200 charitable organizations. He was no longer a working member of the Royal Family, but a member he nonetheless remained.

These actions did little to improve public opinion of Andrew or his actions. In June 2020, Newsweek released a poll suggesting almost 60 per cent of Britons felt Andrew should not only be stripped of his titles, but also extradited to the United States to answer for his conduct with Epstein.

A case of déjà vu

The first major step taken by the Royal Family only came in January 2022 once a judge allowed Giuffre’s civil suit to proceed. Andrew was stripped of all his military appointments and honourary positions.

At the same time, Buckingham Palace announced Andrew would no longer be referred to as His Royal Highness. To date, there has been no formal decree stripping Andrew of HRH. It simply disappeared from his name.

That makes his recent announcement to give up his royal titles seem like a case of déjà vu.

Despite appearances to the contrary, he hasn’t actually been renounced or been stripped of those titles or honours. They have simply fallen into dormancy; an inactive limbo. Andrew is still a prince and is still in the line of succession to the British throne, at least for now.

The natural question that many people are now asking is why hasn’t Andrew been formally stripped of these titles? Why is he still a prince? To answer those question, it’s necessary to explain what these titles mean and the process to remove them, which is actually much more complicated than meets the eye.

Andrew’s titles

Let’s start with the prince. As a child of the late Queen Elizabeth, Andrew was born a prince of the United Kingdom. In 1917, King George V issued a royal decree known as Letters Patent. The document stated “that the children of any Sovereign …shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess.”

There is currently no mechanism for stripping a sovereign’s child of that princely title. But never say never.

In 1986, Queen Elizabeth granted Andrew the titles Duke of York, Earl of Inverness and Baron Killyleagh. These titles are known as peerages.

For centuries, it has been customary for sovereigns to bestow peerages on their sons and heirs. Prince William was made Duke of Cambridge on his wedding day in 2011. Prince Harry was similarly granted the title Duke of Sussex when he married Meghan Markle in 2018.

It has become tradition that certain peerages go to certain members of the Royal Family. Since 1474, for example, the title Duke of York has been bestowed on the sovereign’s second son.

An act of parliament

For nearly 40 years, this title has been synonymous with Prince Andrew. When it was recently announced that he would no longer use his peerage titles, news reports spread like wildfire with headlines declaring he had lost or relinquished his titles. Neither, in fact, has happened.

King Charles can’t simply revoke a peerage once it has been granted. Doing so would require an act of parliament under some pretty extreme circumstances. It has only happened twice in the last two centuries.

In 1798, parliament passed an Act of Attainder (or treason) against Lord Edward Fitzgerald for leading a rebellion in Ireland.

In 1917, parliament passed the Titles Deprivation Act during the First World War. Several German princes held British titles because they descended from Queen Victoria. The act provided parliament with a way to deprive enemy German princes of their “British dignities and titles” for fighting against Britain in the war.

Prince Andrew’s recent announcement has done little to deflect public fury away from him. This week, a group of British parliamentarians presented a motion to take legal steps to officially remove his peerages. As more Epstein revelations come to light, Andrew’s troubles are clearly far from over.

Justin Vovk has previously received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada. He is an advisory board member of the Institute for the Study of the Crown in Canada.

– ref. Prince Andrew didn’t really give up his titles, and truly removing them would be onerous – https://theconversation.com/prince-andrew-didnt-really-give-up-his-titles-and-truly-removing-them-would-be-onerous-267940

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Megan Levings, Professor of Surgery and Biomedical Engineering, University of British Columbia

While Canada invests billions in infrastructure projects and national defence, a critical area of investment remains overlooked:
biomanufacturing.

Biomanufacturing is the production of biological products like vaccines and cell therapies at the scale and quality needed for human use. It encompasses everything needed to reliably produce and deliver safe, effective biological products from development to commercial-scale production.

This sector requires not only physical infrastructure like bioreactors, clean rooms and equipment, but also the availability of skilled personnel, robust supply chains and quality control — all operating under strict regulatory requirements.

Amid Canada’s ongoing tariff tensions with the United States, investing in domestic biomanufacturing is a way for Canada to strengthen its economic independence while securing critical health infrastructure.

A wake-up call for Canada

Canada once boasted world-class biomanufacturing capacity, particularly in vaccine production. Over the past few decades, however, domestic investment in this sector withered away.

Funding for research, training and infrastructure declined, and as a result, much of the industry migrated to the United States, where more start-up capital, larger markets and more extensive infrastructure supported its growth.

The COVID-19 pandemic made the consequences of this decline painfully clear. Billions of dollars were spent importing life-saving vaccines and therapeutics that could have been made here. While Canada’s dependence on foreign manufacturing predates the pandemic, the crisis highlighted the urgent need for domestic capacity.

Future pandemics are unpredictable, and new Canadian manufacturing infrastructure needs to be poised to act. This is especially important given ongoing vaccine skepticism and hesitancy.

If Canadians need a new vaccine, the country must be able to produce it domestically and support other countries lacking access.

Missed opportunities

Biomanufacturing has expanded beyond vaccines and monoclonal antibodies to include cell and gene therapies and new drug types, such as those based on RNA.

These advanced therapeutic products are highly innovative, but don’t fit neatly into traditional developmental pipelines or regulatory frameworks. Without the necessary manufacturing processes and infrastructure, countries can miss out on economic and health benefits and are vulnerable to future pandemics.

For example, the research to develop the lipid nanoparticle component of an mRNA vaccine was conducted in Canada. Yet when it came time to manufacture, test and distribute the vaccine, Canada lacked the infrastructure and had to rely on foreign suppliers.

Historically, Canada has excelled at research but has struggled to translate breakthroughs into domestic production. With the right investment, Canada could actually reap the benefits of its own innovations.

Recognizing this gap, the federal government has invested $2.3 billion since 2023 to build new facilities capable of manufacturing biologics at the speed and scale for future pandemic responses. These investments also aim to revitalize Canada’s capacity for producing other, more conventional drugs.

---

Read more:
Canada needs to invest more money into science innovation to help prevent the next global crisis

---

But more sustained investments are needed — ones on par with funding for other infrastructure projects and national defence. The biomanufacturing sector offers tremendous opportunity for economic growth, significant health benefits for Canadians, and pandemic-preparedness.

The biotech boom

Gaps in Canada’s biomanufacturing capacity spurred the creation of a new coalition led by the University of British Columbia. Known as Canada’s ImmunoEngineering and Biomanufacturing Hub, it brings together more than 50 organizations from the private, public, not-for-profit and academic sectors to strengthen life sciences and biomanufacturing capacity in B.C.

It aims to accelerate applied biomedical research, train highly skilled workers and expand domestic infrastructure.

It’s part of a broader $574 million federal commitment supporting 19 projects at 14 research institutions across Canada. Investing in new infrastructure is an important step toward rebuilding and bolstering domestic biomanufacturing in Canada.

We are part of the coalition’s research leadership group and the leads on its flagship infrastructure project, the Advanced Therapeutics Manufacturing Facility, which is being built on the UBC campus. This facility, spanning approximately 20,000 square feet, will support the production of advanced therapeutic products like vaccines, cell therapies and regenerative medicines.

It will accelerate the commercialization of Canadian innovations, enhance patient care and position Canada as a global epicentre of biomanufacturing while leveraging Vancouver’s biotech boom.

Construction of the facility has begun, with an estimate of March 2028 for opening operations. Projects will include modifying immune cells to fight cancer and protect against autoimmune disease and transplant rejection, as well as turning stem cells into therapies that heal or replace terminally damaged organs.

From research to market

Pandemic-prepared facilities have the potential to generate wide-ranging health benefits for Canada. A critical function of facilities like the Advanced Therapeutics Manufacturing Facility is moving innovative therapies from early-stage research to clinical trials and, ultimately, market approval.

In addition to their health benefits, advanced therapeutics can have significant economic impact. Their curative potential allows companies to benefit from premium pricing, with high upfront costs justified by reduced long-term health-care costs.

Subsequent generic versions of these biological products, termed biosimilars, can provide safe, effective and economical alternatives. Ultimately, domestic manufacturing allows greater pricing control and allows health-care dollars to stay in Canada.

The biomanufacturing industry also creates high-quality jobs, boosts national innovation ecosystems, attracts large-scale venture capital funding and supports pharmaceutical partnerships.

Canada’s bioeconomy is expected to need approximately 65,000 jobs by 2029, making workforce training a critical priority. State-of-the-art training facilities will produce a highly qualified workforce and ensure these skilled personnel remain in Canada.

Investing in domestic infrastructure also strengthens Canada’s export potential. Adding advanced therapeutic products into the country’s export portfolio will give it an important trade advantage and allow Canada to become a global player in biomanufacturing.

Megan Levings receives funding from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and BC Knowledge Development Fund for the ATMF Project.

Robert A. Holt receives funding from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and BC Knowledge Development Fund for the ATMF Project.

– ref. Why Canada’s next big infrastructure investment should be in biomanufacturing – https://theconversation.com/why-canadas-next-big-infrastructure-investment-should-be-in-biomanufacturing-254377