Industrial Program and Economic Impact
From inception, the CLS showed a "strong commitment to industrial users and private/public partnerships", with then-director Bancroft reporting "more than 40 letters of support from industry indicating that is important for what they do". This commitment has been criticised, notably by University of Saskatchewan professor Howard Woodhouse, since only two private companies provided capital funding, with the rest coming from public funds, while up to 25% of beamline time at CLS is allocated to commercial use. The CLS has an industrial group, within the larger experimental facilities division, with industrial liaison scientists who make synchrotron techniques available to a "non-traditional" user base who are not synchrotron experts. By 2007 more than 60 projects had been carried out, although in a speech in the same year, then-CLS director Bill Thomlinson said that "one of the biggest challenges for the synchrotron...is to get private users through the door", with less than 10% of time actually used by industry.
In 1999 then-Saskatoon mayor Dayday stated that "the CLS will add $122 million to Canada's GDP during construction and $12 million annually after that". An economic impact study of the two financial years 2009/10 and 10/11 showed the CLS had added $45 million per year to the Canadian GDP, or about $3 for every $1 of operating funding. The CLS has been cited as an example of the commercialization of university research endangering "other areas of scholarship and research that is perceived to be of little immediate utility for generating private monetary wealth". The CLS itself has stated that "the primary means of accessing the CLS is through a system of peer review, which ensures that the proposed science is of the highest quality and permits access to the facility to any interested researcher, regardless of regional, national, academic, industrial or governmental affiliation."
Read more about this topic: Canadian Light Source
Famous quotes containing the words industrial, program, economic and/or impact:
“Dead power is everywhere among us—in the forest, chopping down the songs; at night in the industrial landscape, wasting and stiffening the new life; in the streets of the city, throwing away the day. We wanted something different for our people: not to find ourselves an old, reactionary republic, full of ghost-fears, the fears of death and the fears of birth. We want something else.”
—Muriel Rukeyser (1913–1980)
“If the worker and his boss enjoy the same television program and visit the same resort places, if the typist is as attractively made up as the daughter of her employer, if the Negro owns a Cadillac, if they all read the same newspaper, then this assimilation indicates not the disappearance of classes, but the extent to which the needs and satisfactions that serve the preservation of the Establishment are shared by the underlying population.”
—Herbert Marcuse (1898–1979)
“America is no place for an artist: to be an artist is to be a moral leper, an economic misfit, a social liability. A corn-fed hog enjoys a better life than a creative writer, painter, or musician. To be a rabbit is better still.”
—Henry Miller (1891–1980)
“Television does not dominate or insist, as movies do. It is not sensational, but taken for granted. Insistence would destroy it, for its message is so dire that it relies on being the background drone that counters silence. For most of us, it is something turned on and off as we would the light. It is a service, not a luxury or a thing of choice.”
—David Thomson, U.S. film historian. America in the Dark: The Impact of Hollywood Films on American Culture, ch. 8, William Morrow (1977)