|
|
Speech
ADDRESS TO THE SYDNEY INSTITUTE
19 JULY 2006
Tonight I want to talk about Science and Innovation - Big Science. Big Picture.
I will map out my thoughts on what I see as current imperatives for Australian science and innovation, along with the higher education and research systems that underpin them. These are the areas that will impact on the lives of all of Australia, and I want to explore new ideas for how we might address many of the challenges that we are facing now and in the future.
Science and innovation have long been linked to the prosperity of communities and nations. This is even more so today, for science and innovation are the keys to addressing many of the challenges of the modern world. Their influence and potential is astounding: just think of medical science; environmental remediation and management; communications; transport – just to name a few.
Groundbreaking ideas generated by innovative minds in the private and public sectors have paid enormous dividends in improving the lives and livelihoods of many Australians.
This Government has made a long-term commitment to building a world-class science and innovation system. Through our 10 year, Backing Australia’s Ability and Backing Australia’s Future packages, we have begun to put in place a number of strategic measures and drivers aimed at strengthening our core science, research and higher education capabilities. These are aimed at keeping Australia competitive on a global level.
But the question remains “Is this enough?” New drivers are emerging on both global and domestic fronts that are placing new pressures on our current capabilities. But they also present new opportunities, if we are willing to grasp them.
Internationally, countries around the world are increasingly seeing science and innovation as the means to building healthier, socially integrated, and economically and environmentally sustainable societies,and platforms for success in the global marketplace.
We need to act quickly and with renewed vigour to strengthen the foundations of our competitiveness, and build a prosperous future for this nation. We need to do this on a broad front as part of a new, forward looking vision for science, higher education and research in Australia.
At the American/Australian Leadership Dialogue in Washington recently, John Marburger, the United States Director for Science and Innovation Policy, outlined the American Competitiveness Initiative. This had been announced by President Bush in the State of the Union address, the core elements including a renewed commitment and boost in funding for long-term research, improvements to years K-12 maths and science education, and fostering the expansion of a favourable environment for private-sector investment in innovation.
The US estimates that as much as half its post World War II economic growth is due to R&D fuelled technological progress. Today, the US recognises that its future economic strength and its global leadership depend upon its ability to harness the latest in scientific and technological developments and apply them to real world applications.
Newer players, such as China and India, are investing heavily in their science and innovation systems. For example, over the period 1991-2004 China’s investment in research and development grew by roughly a factor of 13. Over the last five years of that period it added almost 400,000 researchers to its skills base. In 2004 China reported nearly 645,000 degrees in Engineering. Australia - 30,000.
Clearly, countries around the world are aiming to use brainpower as a catalyst for economic development.
And while we can take pride in our Nobel Prize winners, our Rhodes Scholars, our Federation Fellows and our scientific achievements, at a time when other countries are strengthening their capabilities, there is emerging evidence that some of Australia’s domestic capabilities are in danger of softening. One area where this is particularly apparent is in our science and engineering skills base.
The Government recently commissioned an Audit of Science, Engineering and Technology skills to examine trends in the demand and supply of these skills in Australia.
This evening I am releasing the final report of that Audit – a little more on that later – but it finds that, just as global demand and competition for Science Engineering and Technology skills is intensifying, we are under threat of skills shortages in many of the very engineering and scientific disciplines we most need. There are indications that our capabilities may be further eroded if the current trends in quality and uptake of courses and career paths are not reversed.
The audit also highlights the brain drain / brain gain conundrum – or as I like to suggest – brain circulation, as our best and brightest are increasingly mobile. The report does find that we are currently in a net gain skills position due to our increase in skills migration, but we are competing for skills on an international basis and this picture may well change.
A renewed focus on strengthening the underpinning elements of Australia’s science and innovation system is not just desirable, it is imperative.
Let me list several capabilities that are critical to our achievement:
- Global engagement. We need to engage globally by more aggressively identifying our strengths, and where those strengths can be built on, through partnerships with particular countries.
- Quality research. We need to pursue new ways to boost the quality and impact of our research to put it on par with the world’s best.
- World-class infrastructure. Having identified our strengths, we need to provide our researchers with the infrastructure that places them at the cutting-edge of scientific discovery and supports their training needs.
- Competitive skills. We need to nurture the skills base that our modern world demands through a renewed focus on improving the quality of science education in our schools and universities and by providing rewarding career paths for our best and brightest students and researchers.
- Connected industry and communities. We need to make better connections between our science, research and higher education and our communities and industries so that we can ensure that Australia remains well placed to capture the maximum benefits from its investment for our economy and society.
We can achieve each of these goals as part of a system-wide refreshment of Australia’s capabilities.
Global Engagement
Science and research are international fields of human endeavour and a driving force of globalisation itself. Many of the common features of our historic civilisations owe their origins to cross-fertilisation from scientific, mathematical and technological exchanges.
International collaboration has become an essential element of science, research and higher education, bringing benefits from the convergence of ideas and the meeting of bright minds. It supports global economies in meeting common and domestic needs and contributes to the global circulation of skills and talent.
We are now moving into an era in which international collaboration will be even more important and require a new focus and consideration of how we can strategically partner with the rest of the world.
A number of global challenges are beginning to emerge that threaten the future prosperity of all nations, including climate change, access to water, secure, clean and efficient energy sources, and emerging diseases.
Australia is strengthening its bilateral science relationships. This year, for example, the Prime Minister announced the establishment of the Australia-India Strategic Research Fund, providing $20 million over five years for collaboration between Australian and Indian scientists.
Australia is also collaborating with its regional partners and the US, to establish the tsunami monitoring and early warning system for the Indian Ocean. Given the events of the last few days, the tsunami up the coast of Indonesia, this can’t come soon enough.
These initiatives recognise the incredible potential that partnerships with other nations have for Australia. However, we have failed to fully realise other opportunities.
By identifying Australia’s existing and emerging strengths, I aim to use our current efforts and existing resources in a more targeted and strategic way.
In doing so I will build partnerships with specific countries possessing complementary interests and capabilities to Australia and, where appropriate, to establish bilateral funds to enable scientific collaboration. We currently have three bilateral science funds with China, India and France. What of the US, the UK, the EU, Singapore or Brazil?
We could create joint international centres of excellence that could provide Australia with greater collaborative research partnerships, thus enhancing our scientific capability.
At the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) meeting last month, a working group reported on the impact on Australia of the recent strong growth in China and India.
I don’t believe we should limit our horizons to the emerging economies of only China and India. Through PMSEIC I have supported the establishment of a new working group to analyse more broadly our existing international science and technology activity to address issues, including:
- Which countries have the most to offer Australia in terms of building our science and innovation capability?
- Where are our existing, and what are our emerging, areas of strength?
- Can we be sure that we are getting the best value from our current international engagement?
- And, where can government most usefully intervene?
Once we have the answers we will be better positioned to ensure that our international science and innovation efforts and resources are well targeted and make a significant contribution to Australia’s economic prosperity.
Quality
Of course it is not enough just expect to engage with the rest of the world – we also need to have something to offer. It is clear that Australia cannot compete with the investments of global giants such as China and the US but what we can do is ensure that the quality of Australian scientific and research endeavour in our areas of strength is world-class and that it is progressing our social, economic and environmental goals.
To that end, I am committed to a Research Quality Framework – a new initiative to ensure publicly funded research is measured against international benchmarks for its quality and its impact. Development and implementation of a Research Quality Framework has the potential to provide us, for the first time, with a robust assessment mechanism of both the quality and impact of the research produced by Australian institutions and to act as a driver of excellence on a broad front.
Assessment of impact has been the source of some contention, but is also of great academic and intellectual interest. And rightly so, as it has not been done before.
No-one should underestimate the effect the Research Quality Framework will have on Australia’s research activity. No more incentives for mediocrity. The funding must follow excellence and relevance.
Infrastructure
To become a leading research nation we need to ensure that our research is underpinned by leading edge, high calibre infrastructure.
Through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy, the Government is providing more than $500 million to build the critical capabilities that will underpin both discovery and application-based research in Australia.
We have identified 16 priorities through the Infrastructure Strategy program to support research activity infrastructure in emerging fields such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, biosecurity and environmental monitoring.
This process has been the catalyst for a new spirit of collaboration in the research community.
While this Strategy will do much to serve the infrastructure needs of Australian scientists and researchers, we need to do much more. The cost and complexity of research and facilities in recent years have escalated, and continue to escalate, in response to rapid scientific and technological developments. To remain competitive we must take our investments to the next level. In particular, we must recognise that some of the most exciting and challenging scientific problems of the future will only be solved through large-scale, multi-national efforts beyond the resources of any one country.
This is particularly true in the area of astronomy – one of Australia’s recognised areas of research excellence. The Australian Government has committed $20 million to developing a ground-breaking, next-generation radio telescope, the ‘Extended New Technology Demonstrator’, to be built in Western Australia. You need open spaces with no noise, and we’ve got just the ideal site in Western Australia. This telescope will demonstrate new technologies needed for the Square Kilometre Array. That is a $2 billion international project that global partners are currently looking at placing somewhere on the earth, and Australia is now putting in place some of the capabilities to attract a project like the Square Kilometre Array – it is all about tracking the origins of the universe. This is really Big Science!
Participation in such “Big Science” projects will be critical in taking Australia’s agenda for science and innovation into the 21st century and beyond. We need to look at how we can optimise the intellectual, economic and political rewards that involvement in such major international efforts can bring.
Australia should consider its level of involvement in other major international projects such as the collaboration around the development of Generation IV nuclear power reactors and the development of nuclear fusion technology, discovered by renowned Australian Sir Mark Oliphant.
Competitive skills
In order to think big, we need to look at our foundations. Our universities must aim for world’s best. There is no excuse for pursuing the “one size fits all” model of the past and universities must diversify not only to thrive, but also to survive.
To maintain our global reputation for education excellence, and to maintain our fourth largest export, International Education Services, state universities must diversify and pursue their strengths. This will mean, over time, changed missions, changed course selection and delivery mechanisms, changed academic and managerial structures. Standing still is no longer good enough.
The findings of the Science Engineering and Technology Skills Audit report that I have released tonight give rise to a number of challenges. In particular, the report forecasts that Australia’s supply in key science, education and technology areas will not be sufficient to meet future demand.
Projected demand for science skills suggests that we will need an additional 55,000 professionals by 2012-13 while our supply is likely to fall short by up to 35%.
The report suggests that there are a number of issues around uptake of Science Engineering and Technology studies and career paths, which, if not addressed, will reinforce the problem – such as the static or declining rates of student participation in these courses; concerns that we must improve the quality of Science Engineering and Technology education, and evidence that career paths and opportunities are poorly understood and limited in some areas.
We must respond to these challenges quickly and instigate a range of actions – in our classrooms, in our universities, in our industries and in our communities. This must be an integral component of our forward agenda for science and innovation so that we can build on and grow the intellectual capital that can sustain us.
As a follow-up to the report, I have commissioned research into how we can improve Australia’s Science Engineering and Technology capacity. Such as how the community engages with Science, Engineering and Technology, what triggers the engagement of pre-school aged children and primary school students with Science, Engineering and Technology and what career paths are available.
I am particularly concerned by the lack of uptake of science in schools. I agree entirely with those who are convinced that science and mathematics education is critical for building a strong and innovative society.
We need to engage young people in science early. On the way here, I was recalling how George Negus told me recently that his eldest son Ned, was studying ophiology. I said, ‘What, he woke up one morning and decided he wanted to be an ophiologist and study snakes?’ George said that way back at his son’s fifth birthday, instead of getting a clown at the party, they invited along an ophiologist who brought along snakes and other creepy crawlies, and young Ned Negus was smitten. From that day on, he was going to be a scientist or researcher studying snakes!
We should never underestimate the power of introducing children early to the wonders and mysteries of science. Ask any distinguished scientist and they will identify a teacher who inspired them to undertake science subjects during their schooling. We must maintain a high-quality of science and maths teaching in schools to meet the challenges.
I was impressed during recent my discussions with John Marburger and later with United States Secretary for Education Margaret Spellings that the United States has adopted an aggressive strategy to boost the quality of science and maths education in its schools. Its new Ten Thousand Teachers, Ten Million Minds initiative has a number of ambitious aims, including:
- 10,000 more scientists, students, post doctoral fellows and technicians given opportunities to contribute to the innovation exercise.
- 100,000 more highly qualified maths and science teachers by 2015.
- 800,000 more workers skilled for the jobs for the 21st century and so on.
Australia already has in place a number of laudable initiatives and programmes to support science education in our schools. These include:
- innovative school projects, such as the Australian School Innovation in Science Technology and Mathematics Project;
- curriculum modules and professional development programmes for teachers and initiatives such the Questacon Smart Moves Invention Convention which brings together secondary students and their ideas from around Australia. A five–day program of: ideas development; money management; intellectual property issues; networking and mentoring; commercialisation; and guest speakers from business/science worlds; and
- CSIRO’s Double Helix Science Club - a science awareness club for children – with 17000 members! Over the last 20 years, more than 100,000 kids have been members.
But we need to do more and develop a more coherent, coordinated and national approach to science education in Australia. And we must have a greater continuous supply of highly trained qualified teachers in maths and science – from our teaching graduates to those working in science or maths professions who could be encouraged to take up teaching.
I am establishing the Australian School Science Education Framework to map the key science education initiatives that are currently in place. The framework will identify what gaps exist in our current programmes, and determine what works and then recommend actions to enhance and address future priority needs in science education. This must be a highly collaborative project that will require significant commitment from all States and all sectors.
Improvements to science education alone will not be sufficient to attract and retain our best and brightest in science, engineering and technology careers. They must be provided with quality career paths.
In the last six months I have been asked on more than occasion by the scientific and research community “What are you doing to ensure our young PhDs and post-Docs continue with a research career?”
And from talking to many early career researchers over the past few months they tell me that they are looking for career stability and are frustrated with the amount of time they spend writing grant applications just in order to maintain their project funding.
Our bright young scientists should be encouraged to go overseas to gain international recognition and exposure, but we need to ensure that they have a reason to return to Australia. We need longer term research grants and research fellowships. On average the length of a research grant is 3 years. Given that researchers are expected to write their next application in year two when they should really be approaching the substance of the research, this is hardly an ideal situation. One idea is to make the ARC Discovery grants automatically 5 years of duration and I intend to examine this issue with the ARC.
To this end, I announce this evening that CSIRO will increase its investment in its early to mid career researchers with an additional 40 new postdoctoral fellows and an additional 10 new CSIRO Science Leaders. The CSIRO Science Leader Scheme is directed to high performing scientists with between 5 and 10 years post-doctoral experience. This increased investment will amount to $18.3 million over three years and provide important career opportunities to Australian researchers.
But I want to take this further and I have an idea, framed in part from my current bedtime reading list which includes Peter Doherty’s “The Beginner’s Guide to winning the Nobel Prize”, which lucidly explains the rewards and pitfalls of a career in scientific research in Australia!
Imagine if our post-docs went on to long term contractual positions within our premier scientific organisations, with the possibility of international placements at similar overseas institutions. In my ‘perfect’ science world, CSIRO, for example, would have a certain number of competitive places available to outstanding university students seeking to have a permanent research career. The student could undertake a PhD with close supervision by CSIRO, then be offered a Post-Doctoral position, to be followed by a permanent position with opportunities for international exchanges. I have asked CSIRO to look into such a ‘career ladder’ scheme and what it would take to establish it.
And why couldn’t such a career ladder scheme be introduced into some of our other research agencies such as ANSTO (our Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) or private research institutions.
And this raises the question, why do we equate career progression with management? Why are we surprised that Bill Gates has determined to keep his best researchers and programmers in research and programming and pay them well to avoid them leaving to pursue management roles for career advancement?
Finally, Connections. How to best capture the full potential of Australian scientific and research endeavour?
We need to concentrate on building effective connections and pathways between researchers and industry and the community which go beyond a focus on patents, licensing and start-up companies.
One successful example of these connections is the Government’s Cooperative Research Centre Programme which promotes long-term strategic collaborations between researchers and research users from universities, industry and the public sector. A recent study by the Allen Consulting Group measured the economic impact of CRCs and concluded that as a result of the CRC Programme the nation’s GDP is cumulatively higher by at least $1.14 billion.
Australia needs to do more to engage in the early stages of research. India, for example, has established Institutes of Technology to foster excellence in separate areas of national importance in higher education and research.
Our universities have an important role to play in building separate areas of excellence. At the first Ministerial Council on Education which I attended two weeks ago, State Education and Territory Ministers agreed for the first time at the Australian Government’s insistence to create specialist universities operating in teaching and research in one or two fields, moving, for the first time, from the obsession with comprehensive universities, universities trying to be all things to all students.
Our existing universities are also starting to look seriously at their areas of specialisation. James Cook University, for example, has a significant focus on tropical and marine science, while Curtin University is gradually becoming a world renowned energy and mineral resource engineering and sciences university. But we lack the real specialist universities of our overseas competitors – such as the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology which specialises in engineering, natural sciences, architecture and mathematics, or in the US, the Rockefeller University which is devoted exclusively to Medical Research.
I have outlined for you this evening some of my views on science and innovation in Australia – why it is important, where we are performing well, and where I see room for improvement. I am looking at ways to build on the strengths we already have and extend these into new areas of endeavour and performance.
I don’t believe we can defer consideration of these important issues for the prosperity of our nation depends upon it.
|
