By John W. Graham

September 12, 2023

In the short term, the economic activity generated by cultural, scientific and education related activities is extremely important for the Canadian economy… in the medium and long term, a country that does not project a clearly defined image of what it is and it represents is doomed to anonymity on the international scene.

Special Joint Committee Reviewing Canadian Foreign Policy, 1994.

Effective cultural diplomacy shapes our image around the globe, and image matters in commerce, diplomacy and international clout.

It follows that a nation confronting unprecedented trade and foreign policy challenges should be expected to deploy its most effective diplomatic skills available. Does Canada meet that test? Not on all fronts. In public and cultural diplomacy – among Canada’s principal soft power assets — there is a surprising and costly gap. This is the result of the Harper government’s cancellation of the Understanding Canada program in 2012, and the reluctance of the present government to restore that program.

From its initiation in 1974 until funding was withdrawn, the Understanding Canada program supported the International Council for Canadian Studies (ICCS) and its member associations. By 2012, this network sustained more than 7000 scholars active in 55 countries within an infrastructure of 28 national associations and five multilateral centres. Funding from the Canadian government was approximately $5.5 million a year.

The program became an outstanding success with increasing returns for Canada and was regarded by many in Foreign Affairs as one of the department’s most cost-effective small-scale programs.

In American universities from Berkeley to Yale to Johns Hopkins, Understanding Canada enabled a level of academic depth and rigour that belied the perception of this country as an appurtenance to the United States. The existence of a serious network of academic endeavour devoted to our history, our economy, our system of governance, our health care model, our political geography and our culture created an infrastructure of knowledge that delineated a Canadian identity separate from the US and provided a counternarrative to the myth that benign is synonymous with boring.

Calculations revealed that sales of books, films, and income related to student and faculty travel linked to the program reached upwards of $20 million a year.  Not a huge number, but a significant return on investment. A further calculation indicated that income related to student and faculty leveraging of non-government investment was “at the rate of $36 in programming for every dollar in expenditure” – meaning that (approximately) $70 million was being injected into the Canadian economy annually. A major reason for the low cost is the fact that foreign universities willingly bear the lion’s share of program costs.

The experience of the program in the United States is germane. This country’s primary diplomatic challenge is managing that relationship, with all of its extraordinarily complex networks. While attention focuses on the roles played in Washington and Ottawa, the country’s interests are also advanced outside the two capitals. Canada maintains twelve Consulates General and three trade offices in the United States. Although the need to ‘message’ their constituencies remains acute, these offices have been handicapped by the loss of the Understanding Canada program.

Within Washington’s diplomatic community, the program gained such a reputation that the US State Department recommended programs to other countries based on the Canadian model. American academics leveraged the Canadian investments with their own institutions, often obtaining dollar-for-dollar matches. Past ambassadors and consuls general have seen the program as a major asset.

Within Washington’s diplomatic community, the program gained such a reputation that the US State Department recommended programs to other countries based on the Canadian model.

A comparative study of annual per capita expenditures on cultural diplomacy (including international education) produced these figures (Cdn dollars): France $26.50, Germany $18.49, UK $13.37, Japan $12.60 and Canada $3.08. These are not up-to-date figures, but significant changes in these disparities are unexpected.

More importantly, the non-dollar measurable benefits are more valuable in the context of intellectual and cultural cross fertilization and of positive returns for Canada’s image.

Since its inception the Understanding Canada program has pushed beyond the original plan to root it in the social sciences and humanities. This concept widened to include film, telecommunications, Indigenous studies, multiculturalism, environmental studies, ethnic diversity and a galaxy of other pursuits with distinctive Canadian content.

However, the benefits have been increasingly at risk since the decision eleven years ago to discard the program. Of the 28 national associations of Canadian Studies, only 16 remain more or less operational. Activities, publications and academic outreach are in decline. Funds for research grants came largely from Global Affairs and the absence of this funding has meant that it is almost impossible to recruit new faculty.

Support for restoring funding, updating and reinvigorating the study of Canada abroad is seen as vital when the benefits of the program are understood. This was the position taken In 2019  by the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, acknowledging that Canadian Studies influenced the positions of foreign countries about Canada.

Another powerful signal is the list of distinguished members of the Advancing Canada Coalition established by pollster Nik Nanos. Several have expressed their views in letters to the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, now engaged in reviewing Canadian foreign policy. With their consent, and because they are well placed to understand the implications of the government’s neglect of this program, selected quotations are set out below.

John English, OC, FRSC, Co-Chair, Canadian International Council, MP for Kitchener 95/97:

“In the world, Canada is the least studied and least known G-7 country. Others do not know our values or always understand our interests. No investment would give larger returns than renewing and expanding Canadian Studies.’’

Michael Kergin, former Canadian Ambassador to the United States and to Cuba:

“I am informed that of the G-7, Canada is the only country that does not have an active academic studies program in the USA. Sadly, the American public is unaware of the economic and security benefits associated with living alongside their benign northern neighbour. … For a minimal investment, US scholars, encouraged by the Canadian Studies program, can kindle a widening pool of knowledge among US opinion formers.”

Jeremy Kinsman: Former ambassador to Russia, to the EU, and to Italy and former High Commissioner to the UK:

“Any officer who serves in the US or the UK becomes swiftly aware of the gap in public awareness between Canada’s stereotyped image and Canadian reality. That is a negative for Canadian public policy interests. The Canadian Studies program was an immensely successful remedial program. I found the termination of this program… incomprehensible.”

Margaret MacMillan, CC, CH, OM, Professor of History, University of Toronto, Professor, International History, Oxford University.

“In an increasingly fragmented world, with dangerous regional and global tensions and as globalization is reversing itself, understanding among states and their peoples is more important than ever to sustain a peaceful international order. Regrettably, the previous government cancelled a highly-effective and low cost means of furthering and extending that effort. In failing to reinstate Understanding Canada, the present government is allowing through its inaction the disappearance of a web of links and a body of knowledge about Canada that added a vital element to promoting and projecting Canada’s soft power abroad.”

Gerald Wright, PhD, Senior Fellow, Norman Paterson School. Special Advisor, Secretary of State for External Affairs 92/93:

“Geopolitical shifts are under way that make it extremely difficult for Canada’s voice to be heard. Rising countries from the Global South will drown us out if we do not make our mark as a country and a people of ambitions, accomplishments, capabilities and passions.”

Our major commercial competitors invest far more heavily in cultural diplomacy than Canada does.  Few of these countries have the extensive international network that was developed for Canadian Studies. This network, the ICCS, was integrated into the work of our embassies, high commissions and consulates abroad. These were frequently the places foreign media, researchers and policy makers would turn to when writing about Canada.

The loss of locally engaged experts at these missions, including all liaison officers with the Canadian Studies Associations (let go for cost savings), has further critically diminished our ability to explain who we are and our accomplishments.

An issue that bears on the campaign for restored funding is the recent requirement by Treasury Board Minister Anita Anand that departmental expenditures be cut to reduce the deficit. As matters now stand, we are falling behind and the negative costs to Canada are rising.  The costs to our global image and reputation, and to the enrichment of our universities and scientific establishments through cross-fertilization are incalculable.

Our failure to restore funding to Understanding Canada lowers motivation, discourages the recruitment of potential Canadianists, and accounts for the dwindling of voices that explain and enhance the image of Canada abroad.

John Graham is a former career diplomat who served as a Director General, High Commissioner, Ambassador and Minister, Cultural and Public Affairs (London). He has written three books, including the memoir Whose Man in Havana – Adventures from the Far Side of Diplomacy and Potholes and Politics, a Cartoon Portrait of Ottawa.