Abstract:
Global Large Research Infrastructures (LRIs) play a critical role in the international science, technology and innovation ecosystem, yet the underlying mechanisms of their impacts aren’t broadly understood in Canada. This panel convenes leaders of global LRIs to share how these facilities drive economic, social, and strategic benefits globally—and how Canada can better leverage its national assets. The discussion will inform current reviews of Canada’s major research facilities, focusing on the value of lifecycle approaches, enabling mission-driven research, and enhancing national resiliency through science infrastructure.Global Large Research Infrastructures (LRIs) play a critical role in the international science, technology and innovation ecosystem, yet the underlying mechanisms of their impacts aren’t broadly understood in Canada. This panel convenes leaders of global LRIs to share how these facilities drive economic, social, and strategic benefits globally—and how Canada can better leverage its national assets. The discussion will inform current reviews of Canada’s major research facilities, focusing on the value of lifecycle approaches, enabling mission-driven research, and enhancing national resiliency through science infrastructure.

Summary of Conversations

The panel discussed the critical role of Global Large-Scale Research Infrastructures (LRIs) in advancing scientific frontiers and driving technological innovation. Speakers emphasized that these facilities, such as particle accelerators and advanced data centers, are not merely research hubs but engines for disruptive engineering and economic competitiveness. A central theme was the necessity of long-term planning and funding stability, given that LRI lifecycles often span decades—far exceeding typical political or fiscal cycles.

The conversation highlighted the intricate ecosystem connecting government, academia, and industry, noting how fundamental research translates into practical applications like medical isotopes and semiconductor manufacturing. Furthermore, the discussion underscored the importance of international collaboration and science diplomacy, where shared global resources foster partnerships across borders. Ultimately, the consensus was that while LRIs require significant, sustained investment, they provide unique, irreplaceable capabilities that maintain technological leadership and solve complex global challenges.

Take Away Messages and Current Status of Challenges

The following points summarize the insights regarding the barriers and operational realities of LRIs:

• Discordance in Planning Horizons: There is a significant temporal mismatch between the operational lifecycles of LRIs (which can span 50 years from planning to decommissioning) and the short-term nature of political cycles and five-year funding tranches.
• Necessity of Budgetary Certainty: Innovation at this scale is impossible without long-term financial stability; fluctuations in funding undermine the ability to design cathedral-sized detectors and execute multi-decade scientific strategies.
• Complexity of the Innovation Pathway: The path from fundamental research to commercial application is non-linear and “windy,” requiring patience to see how abstract physics translates into disruptive technologies like synchrotrons for structural biology or EUV lithography for semiconductors.
• Reliance on International Diplomacy: In an increasingly fragmented geopolitical landscape, LRIs serve as essential vessels for science diplomacy, requiring complex governance structures to manage contributions from dozens of member nations.
• Gaps in National Strategy: While some regions, like Europe, have established multi-year roadmaps, other nations, such as Canada, face challenges due to the lack of a cohesive national strategy to guide federal investments in major research assets.
• Human Capital Retention: Sustaining these infrastructures requires a continuous pipeline of highly specialized talent (engineers and physicists) that must be developed and retained over the decades-long lifespan of a single project.
• Integration of Diverse Sectors: Successful LRIs must function as a bridge between three distinct pillars—academia, industry, and government—to ensure that scientific enthusiasm is effectively translated into socioeconomic impact.

Recommendations and Next Steps

The discussion pointed toward the following strategic actions and approaches for managing LRIs:

• Institutionalize Long-Term Funding Models: Governments and funding agencies should move toward  long-horizon funding models that lock in budgets, providing the certainty required for massive engineering projects.
• Develop Comprehensive Scientific Roadmaps: Nations should implement rigorous, recurring (e.g., every five years) strategic road mapping exercises to prioritize infrastructure investments and align national interests with global opportunities.
• Leverage Science as a Diplomatic Tool: Policymakers should actively use participation in international LRIs to strengthen diplomatic ties and maintain global connectivity even during periods of political tension.
• Adopt a Portfolio Approach to Innovation: Investment strategies should balance support for small-scale, focused university research with large-scale, high-risk infrastructure projects to ensure a diverse and robust innovation ecosystem.
• Plan for Continuous Technological Upgrades: Facilities should incorporate incremental upgrades (such as beam intensity improvements) into their long-term plans to maintain scientific relevance and maximize the utility of the initial construction investment.
• Strengthen Industry Partnerships: LRI governance must actively cultivate pathways for technology transfer, ensuring that breakthroughs in areas like particle physics are rapidly adapted for industrial applications such as battery research and medical isotopes.
• Harmonize Global and National Priorities: National funding bodies must ensure their domestic infrastructure strategies are compatible with and complementary to international collaborations to avoid redundancy and maximize resource efficiency.
• Modernize Governance Structures: Facilities should adopt modern governance models, such as university consortiums acting as shareholders, to ensure responsiveness to the scientific community while maintaining accountability to government funders.