The Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada represents 68 learned societies, 69 universities and colleges and over 25,000 anglophone and francophone scholars and graduate students active in university research and post-secondary education: the study of languages, sociology, literatures, religion, geography, psychology, anthropology, history, philosophy, classics, law, economics, education, as well as linguistics, aboriginal issues, women's issues, industrial relations and international development. The Federation's members work in urban, rural and northern communities all across the country. The Federation, in response to the invitation by the Advisory Council on Science and Technology, is submitting this brief in order to assist ACST in formulating a policy for funding the indirect costs of university research.

The Federation will address the following points:

•  The federal government's role in supporting university research and post-secondary education
• Support for the indirect costs of research
• The special needs of the social sciences and the humanities in an allocating formula
• The legitimate financial needs of the universities
• Contributions to Canadian society and the economy
• Summary of recommendations

The Federal Government's role in supporting university research and post-secondary education

The Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada considers that the Federal Government has a crucial role to play in post-secondary education. Both as citizens and as researchers, the members of the Federation believe that the health and future of Canadian society rely heavily on the investments that will be made in education.

For some time, the federal government has been an equal partner in the funding of post-secondary education through cash and tax point transfers to the provinces. Recently, the federal government has invested heavily in university research and lessened its support to transfer payments since, we surmise, the Established Programs Financing (EPF) and the subsequent Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) cannot guarantee that cash transfers to the provinces earmarked for post-secondary education are actually used for their intended purpose. This situation results in serious cutbacks in university operating and capital budgets. Further exacerbating the situation is the current trend of some provincial governments to utilize the transfer payments to finance provincial tax cuts, or to finance only certain sectors within higher education. ⁽¹⁾

In December 1999, the Federation tabled the Report of an Expert Panel on Federal Funding Options for Canadian Universities. The Report (attached) outlined a series of alternatives for funding a national capacity for post-secondary education across Canada because the Federation and its members are convinced of the central importance of meeting the educational needs of Canadians and the financial needs of the universities. Core funding will remain a Federation priority.

Support for a program to cover indirect costs

However, the introduction of a well-funded and well-conceived program to fund indirect costs of university research could soften many of the extreme stresses currently felt in Canadian institutions. For this reason, the Federation supports strongly an initiative to fund indirect costs of university research. The initiative must be formulated carefully and must reflect the needs of researchers in every area.

The Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada urges the Advisory Council to adopt an inclusive definition of indirect costs. University research comes in all forms and relies on tools that are sometimes overlooked. For instance, a research library is of vital importance to the intellectual life of the University and to the researcher in any given discipline. The level of institutional support for its library services is an important measure of an institution's commitment to the pursuit of excellence. To remain competitive in their fields, university researchers need access to archival materials, to up-to-date collections of learned journals (in print or electronic forms) and to recently published books. They need to test their research by attending conferences and defending their hypotheses, they need access to electronic databanks that are maintained and updated, they need the means to disseminate their research. To do all this, they must rely on a multitude of university services and peoples; they need physical spaces that are safe and in good repair, and they need the tools of their trade.

The special needs of the social sciences and the humanities

Social sciences and humanities scholars constitute 50% of the professors and students in universities. Many have benefited from the recent increase to the base budget of granting councils and, no doubt, they will benefit from initiatives such as CFI, the Research Chairs, and the CIHRs. On the whole, however, these scholars have not benefited from the federal programs to the same degree as their colleagues in the natural, medical and engineering sciences.

Wittingly or unwittingly, the federal government has been sending a signal to the community of researchers. Because CFI was, at first, conceived to disallow the social sciences and the humanities, because the Chairs were not allocated on a per capita basis and because the CIHR's inter-disciplinarity has yet to be put into action, the federal government is creating the impression that "real" research can only be accomplished in certain disciplines. We are grateful to the federal government for addressing this imbalance by recently allowing the social sciences and the humanities to submit applications to CFI, by ensuring that, notwithstanding their numbers, these disciplines get 20% of the Canadian Research Chairs - instead of the customary and arbitrary 11% allocation - and by insisting on the multi-disciplinary nature of health research.

Further to these encouraging initiatives, we urge the Advisory Council on Science and Technology to produce a strategy for indirect costs that not only does not exclude the social sciences and the humanities but formally recognizes their place as one half of the research actually carried out in Canada's university campuses.

A 1996 report entitled Indirect Costs on Federal Research Contracts to Universities ⁽²⁾ recommended 40% of total research costs as the portion covering indirect costs. We hope that the new study commissioned by the Department of Industry from the same consultant will ensure that the definition of indirect costs - as they relate to the granting councils - will be more inclusive.

The Federation would like to present three issues on the subject of tying indirect costs to research grants and would strongly suggest that this type of allocation formula seriously disadvantages the social sciences and humanities.

As a percentage of total costs, the indirect costs of research in the social sciences and humanities are higher than for other disciplines.

* By definition the direct costs of research in the natural, medical and engineering sciences are higher than those for the social sciences and humanities. Expensive equipment, the cost of processing laboratory samples, and time required to allow for the completion of experiments contribute to high direct costs. Yet the real indirect costs for all disciplines and departments are relatively similar across the board. These indirect costs - building operation and maintenance, libraries, central computing, general and academic administration are the same no matter what disciplines are involved. If indirect costs are a fixed percentage, some allowance ought to be made for the social sciences and humanities.

SSHRC's traditional underfunding results in much lower numbers of research grants

* The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) receives only 12% of the total funding allocated to the three granting councils even though it has more than half of all Canada's scholars and students. As a result, SSHRC's 'success rate' and its ability to meet demand is considerably lower than those of the two other granting councils. The historically low rates of success have discouraged many researchers from applying to SSHRC compounding the problem even more.

Research grants for the social sciences and humanities are significantly smaller than research grants in other disciplines.

* Research grants in the social sciences and humanities are smaller. For instance, in 1998-99 the average SSHRC standard research grant was worth $17,546 and the average request was $24,012. This is almost 50% less than the average research grants in other granting councils. An allocation based on average grants will disadvantage the social sciences and humanities.

The Federation suggests to ACST that the allocation for indirect costs take into account the skewing that already exists in the research grants and consider a higher percentage of total costs for the social sciences and the humanities. For instance a three year rolling average per university could include a weighted ratio of 70% for the social sciences and the humanities and 40% for medical, engineering and natural sciences. Such an adjustment would ensure that all university researchers are treated equally.

The legitimate financial needs of the universities

All universities suffered from the cutbacks in provincial and federal core funding. In many ways, the cutbacks were a great equalizer among institutions of higher learning. Thanks to the federal government, university research has received a major injection of funds that will ensure the growth of research capacity and lessen the brain drain at a critical time in the lives of universities. However, as was apparent in the initial allocation of the Research Chairs, the initiatives have created an imbalance among universities that risks creating short and long term repercussions.

While this was not the intention, the initiatives have disadvantaged liberal arts universities which, no less than their large institutional counterparts, conduct research and strive for and achieve excellence. Yet, no matter the size of the institution, all universities require a minimum to sustain their research projects.

We thank the federal government for correcting this situation in the program of Research Chairs which allows for indirect costs through a CFI-funded initiative. Yet here again, the liberal arts universities are further disadvantaged since the eligibility criteria and the infrastructure funding require a minimum $100,000 in external funding for each of last three years. Typically dependent on smaller SSHRC research grants - which have had traditionally low success rates - liberal arts universities have been penalized for having been penalized. Once again, we trust that the federal government will redress these inequities, that are more pronounced in some regions and affect some researchers more than others, and consider an allocation formula that alleviates rather than exacerbates the problem. For these reasons, the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada urges the ACST to allow for a base amount to all universities since all universities conduct research.

Contributions to Canadian Society and Economy

The university has three mandates - teaching, research and community service. Each of these in turn add to the social and economic growth of not only the students, faculty and support staff at the university but also to the community as a whole. On this point the Federation would like to cite some of the research that outlines the value of scholarly research and creative contributions. These highlights are not only the findings of scholars in the social sciences and humanities but they also emanate from members of the business community.

Earlier this year, the Chancellors of Ontario's universities spoke out on the importance of the liberal arts. They expressed their support by saying that:

"The Liberal arts and sciences must continue to be a seminal part of Ontario's higher education. This is a practical idea as much as a philosophical one. A number of recent studies have clearly underlined that a well-rounded, general education - learning to think, to write and to express one's ideas clearly - is as valuable to future employability as technical or technological training."

Professor Robert Allen of the University of British Columbia and of the Labour Education and Training Research Network of York University published two reports that analyzed the situation. He focused in on British Columbia's labour market during the economic boom of the early 1990s and discovered that, although college-trained graduates were in demand, university graduates were in greater demand and that, of all categories, graduates in social sciences were the most sought-after. While the demand for university-educated workers overall climbed by 41.2%, the greatest increase in demand between 1991 and 1996 in B.C. was for workers with PhDs (+66%). Demand for social sciences graduates went up by a whopping 56% -- outstripping the new demand for engineering (+44%) -- and by 42% for humanities graduates. Remarkably, 23% of the increased employment of humanities graduates was concentrated in business services and 10% was concentrated in manufacturing.

The Labour Education and Training Research Network's report entitled "Universities, Liberal Education, and the Labour Market: Trends and Prospects" (1999) draws much the same conclusion:

"...liberal education is the core of higher learning - in good economic times and bad - and in its effort to prepare people for employment, the university must not be permitted to raze its own intellectual and cultural foundation. In any event, the liberal arts are not static; they continue to be reformed, but less in response to ephemeral market trends than on the basis of intellectual merit. As employers themselves have periodically asserted, by broadening the knowledge base of employees, liberal education can enhance the abilities of graduates in applied and professional fields."

In addition research done in the United Kingdom supports the Canadian findings. A report commissioned by the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals and the Higher Education Funding Council for England entitled Talent, Not Technology: Publicly Funded Research and Innovation in the UK, May 2000, remarks:

"It would be wrong to assume that the social sciences should merely attempt to imitate the natural sciences when it comes to the innovation benefits of research. The social sciences have provided the basis for such public goods as national statistics, censuses, and large parts of the toolbox of the modern management of economics, all of which contribute in fundamental ways to the innovation process. Indeed, the entire way in which society knows about itself is inextricably linked to developments in the social sciences."

The support for the humanities and social sciences comes not only from within, but also from the corporate sector. Several chief executive officers of the hi-technology businesses such as Cisco, Compaq, Xerox and BCE have affirmed that the "Value of Liberal Arts is Increasing" and published their statement in a press release dated April 7, 2000. The declaration emphasized the contribution of the humanities: "They [humanities graduates] have increased their value to our companies, our economy, our culture, and themselves, by acquiring the level of cultural and civic literacy that the humanities offer."

The last word on support for the liberal arts is from Deputy Prime Minister Herb Grey who spoke at the Congress of the Social Sciences and Humanities in May 2000, in Edmonton. Mr. Grey affirmed that the humanities and social sciences have a major role to play in the federal government's plan to develop unique Canadian content to offset the "cultural cacophony" resulting from the increasingly wired and globalized world.

If our disciplines lead to fuller employment and to "a more civil society" ⁽³⁾, they also contribute to the development of public policies. As examples, we cite the titles of recent presentations made to politicians and policy-makers as part of the Breakfasts on the Hill series. These presentations conveyed leading-edge research to those in charge of formulating the laws of Canada and of establishing the country's directions.

* "How Does the Internet Change Politics?", Dr. Michael Dartnell, [4/4/ 2000]
* "Preventing long-term social problems and costs through early support and intervention programs for young children, their mothers and their neighbourhoods: The role of social science research." Ray DeV. Peters, Ph.D. [9/12/99]
* "The WTO, NAFTA and the Future of the Auto Pact" Dr. Maureen Molot [28/10/99]
* "Will the Social Union Divide Canadians?," Dr. Alain Noël [18/03/99]
* "The Impact of Health Care Reform on Women: A Cautionary Tale,"
Dr. Pat Armstrong [11/02/99]
* "Finance, Globalisation and Bank Mergers," Dr. Manfred Bienefeld [10/12/98]
* "The Theory and Practice of Canadian Multiculturalism," Dr. Will Kymlicka [23/11/98]
* "Sustainability of Communities of Fish and Fishers in Canada," Dr. Rosemary E. Ommer [26/03/98]
* "Workplace Literacy Issues in Canada," Dr. Harvey Krahn [12/02/98]

The presentations constitute a minute fraction of the scope and range of the scholarly contributions our disciplines make to Canadian society. Innovation, creativity and productivity are achieved within the university liberal arts community because scholars are given the space, time and freedom to do so. Limiting the definition of the contributions made by the liberal arts to quantifiable products will remove the base upon which future breakthrough is made. Historian Richard Hofstadter wrote (1952) "The best reason for supporting the college and the university lies not in the services they can perform, vital though such services may be, but in the values they represent. The ultimate criterion of the place of higher learning...will be the extent to which it is esteemed not as a necessary instrument of external ends, but as an end in itself." ⁽⁴⁾

The Advisory Council in Science and Technology demonstrates forethought in exploring the question of the indirect costs of research and the Federation urges the Council to recognize the infrastructure needs and the apparatus that must be in place for conducting research in the social sciences in the humanities.

ACST confidential report

For purposes of transparency, the Federation would recommend that the ACST report be accessible to all and posted on its web site.

Major recommendations

• That an investment of $2 billion be made in the next federal budget in order to offset several decades of neglect of post-secondary education.
• That each granting council research grant include an additional allocation for indirect costs
• That each granting council be responsible for disbursing indirect costs
• That a proportion of indirect costs be assigned to university libraries
• That a proportion of total research costs be fixed at 70% for the social sciences and humanities.
• That a base amount for all universities be established in recognition of the research conducted on all campuses and to contribute to capacity-building in an equitable manner.
• That the final report be open to all and posted on the ACST web site.

1. In February 2000, the Premier of Ontario announced new funding for post-secondary education of which; "75% went to expand programs in information technology, applied technology, health and general sciences. Only 25% was set aside for general academic funding, which includes the humanities and social sciences." The Globe and Mail, 28 February 2000.
2. Brochu, Mireille, Report prepared for the Canadian Association of University Research Administrators, the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada and Industry Canada, June 1996.
3. James Downey, Past President Waterloo University, Carleton University Newsletter, May 2000.
4. The Kept University, Atlantic Monthly, March 2000