Printer icon Print Page

Top Story

New Conference Board Economic Indicator

The Conference Board's newly launched Composite Leading Index shows that the Canadian economy will grow in the first half of 2014 — but only modestly. The Index rose 0.3 per cent in December matching the gains made in both October and November. This trend signifies that the economy is growing, but Canadian growth will not pick up the pace until later in the year. The Composite Leading Index sums up the performance of ten components that track the short-term course of the economy.


The Falling Loonie

The biggest economic story of the new year has been the fall of the Canadian dollar. The Conference Board's assessment is that the drop in the dollar, if sustained, would have a small positive impact on economic growth in the short term. Some exporters may stand to benefit, but a declining loonie will also hit all Canadians in the pocketbook. More important than the value of the loonie is the signal it sends about the Canadian economy.

Taxis: That other supply management system

Shopping for milk and hailing a cab are two everyday activities that do not seem to have much in common. Yet, they are more alike than they appear at first glance. Dairy products are managed by a complicated system under which the amount to be produced is predetermined. Taxis are organized much the same way. Taxicab service remains tightly controlled even during times of high demand, such as the holiday season.

Why a Canadian Food Strategy?

Food impacts our lives, our health, our jobs, and our economy. Since 2010, the Conference Board's Centre for Food in Canada has been bringing together stakeholders from different sectors to create a Canadian Food Strategy—one that will meet the country's need for a coordinated, long-term strategy on industry prosperity, healthy and safe food, household food security, and environmental sustainability. The strategy will be launched at the 3rd Canadian Food Summit 2014: From Strategy to Action on March 18–19 in Toronto.

Measuring and Managing Innovation

It is perhaps the worst-kept economic secret in the country. Canada does not take advantage of its innovation capabilities, and that is impeding its growth potential. Canadian firms can use metrics to improve their innovation activities and competitiveness. However, almost 40 per cent of Canadian companies don't measure the success of their innovation activities at all. Of those firms that do, most use the kinds of measures that don't actually link well to their organizations' bottom-line results.

Conference Board of Canada One of the National Capital Region's Top Employers

The Conference Board of Canada is proud to announce that it has again been recognized as one of the National Capital Region's Top Employers for 2014. This marks the fifth time in seven years that the Conference Board has been named to the list of top employers in the Ottawa region. A key to our success is our ability to attract and retain outstanding talent, and this recognition only strengthens our position as an employer of choice.

CBoC Highlights

Photo of the Hon. Jason T. Kenney Photo of Vijay Gill

Satyamoorthy Kabilan, Director, National Security and Strategic Foresight, delivered a presentation on security and intelligence at the Canadian International Council dinner that aired on CPAC on January 18.

Pedro Antunes, Director, National and Provincial Forecast, discussed Canada's December job losses and the economy on CBC's Power & Politics on January 10.

In This Issue

  • New Conference Board Economic Indicator
  • The Falling Loonie
  • Taxis: That other supply management system
  • Why a Canadian Food Strategy?
  • Measuring and Managing Innovation
  • Conference Board of Canada One of the National Capital Region’s Top Employers

Previous Issues


Being Bold and Intentional: Best Practices in Sustainability Reporting
Dec 10 at 2:30 PM

Brexit, Wexit and other Recession Risks—Will Canada’s Economy Squeak By?
Dec 11 at 2:00 PM

Leadership in Conservation across Canada
Jan 08 at 2:00 PM

Latest Blogs

Are We Still Suffering From A Failure of Imagination?

Sep 09, 2016
Satyamoorthy Kabilan
National Security and Strategic Foresight

The attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, are a stark reminder of the danger that global terrorism poses. In the aftermath of the attacks, questions were raised about how such an incident could be perpetrated on American soil. The 9/11 Commission Report delved into the issue and produced a range of findings and recommendations. One particular statement in the Commission’s report has resonated with many and continues to provoke debate and discussion: “The most important failure was one of imagination.”

The Commission’s report outlines the failure of officials within the United States government to appreciate the significance of the threat posed by al Qaeda. The fact that the threat posed by al Qaeda at the time was new and evolving meant that it was difficult to imagine how it might develop and what approaches it might utilize. Fifteen years after the tragic events on September 11, we continue to see new and rapidly evolving terrorist threats across the globe, from Daesh and Al-Shabaab to anti-government groups. Are we any better today at effectively imagining how these threats could evolve and what we can do to deal with them?

One of the approaches used to help rectify the failure of imagination was the wider implementation of foresight approaches in the intelligence community. Foresight does not try to predict the future or the exact actions of an opponent. Instead, the goal of these types of techniques is to provide a broader perspective on how the future threat environment could evolve. In many cases, this involves developing multiple, plausible scenarios that allow a range of possibilities to be examined. The approach helps analysts and decision-makers alike work with uncertainty and try to understand how threats could evolve in the future. This approach has been used across the public and private sectors for a number of decades, with Shell’s global scenarios being a prime example. Imagining how threats might plausibly evolve and identifying options to address them is at the core of the foresight approach.

The United States was not the only nation to explore the use of foresight—a number of its allies, including the United Kingdom, began using foresight tools within their security and intelligence agencies. I worked for the United Kingdom’s Home Office for a number of years and ended up leading a range of foresight activities within law enforcement, security, and intelligence. As part of these responsibilities, I was involved in producing the United Kingdom’s 2011 Strategy for Countering Terrorism (CONTEST), which clearly outlined the need for horizon scanning, a foresight tool, to “stay ahead of new or changing threats and vulnerabilities.” The strategy also clearly outlined some of the risks posed by the use of social media by extremist groups—we had successfully imagined the evolution of some of the approaches that were going to be used by Daesh well in advance of Daesh’s rise to notoriety. Yet we did not manage to stop or stunt the emergence of Daesh and its well-oiled social media machine.

Despite the ability to get over the failure of imagination, we still seem to be struggling with finding pre-emptive success against emerging extremist groups. Rather than a failure of imagination, this seems to have been more a failure of implementation. While the 2011 CONTEST document outlined the emerging threat posed by extremist social media use, it still was not enough to get the government to act in a significant enough manner to deal with the threat. In my conversations and discussions with my counterparts in security and intelligence foresight across the globe, similar issues were cropping up where imagination was no longer the problem—it was implementation.

The challenge we face today is that, although we have tools to deal with the failure of imagination, the findings from these tools are still struggling to gain implementation. It is difficult for decision-makers who are used to solid evidence to deal with the uncertainty that comes with foresight tools that do not predict the future. While we may have, to some extent, addressed the failure of imagination fifteen years after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, there is certainly a risk that we will still be caught out by an emerging extremist group due to our failure of implementation.

Follow Us

Related Research

Related Webinars