NATIONAL PRESS CLUB ADDRESS

Roadmap for a prosperous Australia in a competitive world

26 September 2007
Professor Kurt Lambeck FAA
President, Australian Academy of Science

Introduction

Thank you for your generous introduction.  And thank you, the NPC for the invitation to speak.  To paraphrase Professor Glyn Davis at an earlier address: thank you for being interested in science – you are a rare but welcome breed.

Our distinguished guests today include representatives of over a dozen world science academies who are in Canberra for a meeting of the executive committee of the InterAcademy Panel on International Issues.  They include the Co-Chairs, Professor Howard Alper, Foreign Secretary of the Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada; and Professor Chen Zhu, Minister of Health for the Peoples Republic of China, and until recently Vice President of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Last year at this forum, in my then new position as President of the Australian Academy of Science, I was asked about science policy.  I said then that I would do so when I had become more accepting of the transition from an active scientist to a thinker about the broader role of science in society.  I am not certain that I have made the transition yet, but I cannot avoid the issue any longer, particularly with the release of the Academy's Science Policy statement.

This policy restates the Academy's confirmation of the importance of scientific research and its applications, particularly for Australia in an increasingly competitive world.

I start from the premise: First. That the understanding of how the world works has unquestionably made life better.  When integrated over the existence of Homo sapiens we have to agree that the human condition has improved as a result of the pursuit of knowledge.

Secondly. That the pursuit of this knowledge is by a process that is secure, experimentally verifiable, and unfettered by past beliefs, prejudices and authorities.

Third. That the ongoing pursuit of this knowledge, supported by a robust science policy, is critical for the socioeconomic and environmental well-being of society.

Fourth. That the nation's science policy has to be based on a vision of where the country wants to be in the decades ahead, and how it is going to get there in a competitive, global and rapidly evolving world.

For a vision to be more than a dream it has to be tempered by realities.  So if we want to develop a vision of Australia's place in the world order, in say, 2020, we need to have some understanding of what these realities are.

For a country with a small population, Australia has a proud record of scientific achievement and innovation.  We produce 2.9% of the world's scientific publications with 0.3% of the world's population.  We also have one of the highest number of Nobel Laureates per head of population.  This cannot be maintained without strong support for our research base and scientific infrastructure, and without related policies that lead to more graduates pursuing careers in the natural sciences, engineering and mathematics.

There is also the changing nature of the way science is done:  The days of science in Australia, where a few scientists working in relative isolation – as a cottage industry – could take the world by storm, is largely something of the past.  There will always be the bright spark working in relative isolation producing the earth-shattering idea.  But turning that idea into something productive and profitable is a different matter.  Successful science is increasingly the result of a concerted, multidisciplinary, large team, assault using the latest in sophisticated equipment and computers.  It increasingly cannot be done on small budgets.

Another reality is that our cosy science relationship with Europe and North America is changing.  Our traditional rights to be automatically part of research projects in these regions, earned through a track record of quality research, is being eroded. Countries now attempt to protect their IP, and develop strong regional groupings in research effort, as in the EU.  New major players are appearing with whom we have to forge new relationships and modi operandi.

Forecasts show that China will pass the US as the world's largest economy by 2015, with India taking third place.  Global growth is increasingly driven by the developing economies.  Important in our context is that these economies are also transforming from low cost manufacturing countries to suppliers of advanced technology products and services.  Their products and services already rival those of the developed world.

This new challenge has been recognised by much of the developed world.

For example, the US today is a net importer of high-technology products.  Its trade balance in high-technology manufactured goods shifted from plus $54 billion in 1990 to minus $70 billion this year.

In response to concerns about this loss of international competitiveness, the US Congress commissioned a study by the US National Academies whose report [1] contained four over-arching recommendations:

• Increase America's talent pool by vastly improving mathematics and science education.
• Sustain and strengthen the nation's commitment to long-term basic research.
• Develop, recruit, and retain top students, scientists, and engineers from both the U.S. and abroad.
• Ensure that the United States is the premier place in the world for innovation.

I am not usually in favour of Australia following US actions blindly, but this is one case where I would support it.

The recent APEC meeting in Sydney highlighted the increased competition in our region, while at the same time highlighting the need for integrated solutions to address technologically challenging problems.

For example, APEC includes an Industrial Science and Technology Working Group whose 2007 Work Program has goals of particular significance to Australia that include:

• Enhanced economic growth, trade and investment opportunities in harmony with sustainable development, through innovative R&D, technologies, and knowledge sharing.
• An improved level of connection between research and innovation, involving and encouraging the potential of small and medium enterprises.
• Human resource capacity building.
• Enhanced international science and technology networks.
• Better quality of life and a cleaner environment.
• A safe and secure society, emphasising the importance of measures to mitigate infectious diseases and natural disasters.

The Academy endorses these goals because they relate to many of Australia's scientific and technological strengths and to the contribution they make to the long-term relationships across the region.  We look forward to the transformation of the goals into realities and to Australian science and technology playing an important part in this.

The importance of maintaining a strong S&T base in Australia is now recognised by both sides of government as well as by the broader community.  For example, the Productivity Commission in Public Support for Science and Innovation, [2] reported that:

• There are widespread and important economic, social and environmental benefits generated by Australia's $6 billion public funding support of research and innovation. On the basis of multiple strands of evidence, the benefits of public spending on science and innovation way exceed the costs.

Medical and biological research developments have been particularly influential in shaping this public awareness of the importance of Australian publicly-funded research with its many examples that have led to human health and agricultural advances.

They include Ian Frazer's work leading to the world's first vaccine against cancer; the 2005 Nobel Prize winning research of Barry Marshall and Robin Warren on gastric ulcers; and the most recent Prime Minister's Science Prize rewarded work by Peter Waterhouse and Ming-Bo Wang on gagging genes to protect crop plants from viruses.

But is this enough. What is required to ensure that there is a place for future Australia in the increasingly competitive, increasingly expensive, and increasingly international world of science and technology?

Vision

In developing a vision for Australia's long-term economic prosperity based on strong science and technology, we argue that Australia cannot rely on a farm- and mine-based economy alone:

• Climate change with its water challenges will require major rethinking of our agricultural capacities and priorities.
• Australia is not the only continent with mineral resources.  Some of our major trading partners will no doubt be looking elsewhere for cheaper raw materials.  Political stability is a desirable feature for an exporting nation, but control of a low-cost mining operation, less encumbered by employment conditions and other regulations, may well be an attractive future alternative for some of our current trading partners. 

Thus the Academy's vision for a prosperous Australia in a competitive global world in, say, 2020 is based on a creative knowledge-based society.  One that includes:

• Primary and secondary education programs that stimulate interest, appreciation and understanding across all areas of science.
• A diversified university education system with institutions that rank amongst the world's best in a range of disciplines.
• A strong research base in our universities and other public research organisations that provide career paths for our best graduates.
• Modern research infrastructure and major projects that attract foreign collaborators.
• A private sector investment that supports strategic and applied research, and a technology intensive industry sector that fosters the growth of knowledge-intensive companies with global ambitions. 

What does the Academy recommend to achieve this vision?

It would be tempting – but also irresponsible – to say that all what is needed to achieve this vision is a much greater level of funding for research and development.  Amongst other things, this would fail to recognise that what is also required is a national focus that addresses education at the pre-research stage, and that results in a greater collaboration between our universities, research laboratories and the private sector. 

The Academy's ten-point plan towards achieving this vision is launched here today.  It starts with schooling, and includes the roles of universities and the public research laboratories. It includes the public-private commitment to the exploitation of the research outcomes and it identifies infrastructure and future staffing needs.

In many ways, Australia's future comes down to three words: education, education, education:  Education – not restricted just to science – at primary, secondary and tertiary levels.  Education to provide scientifically literate leaders who can make intelligent decisions about the use and development of science and technology at all levels of government, administration and business.  Education that enable individuals to make their own decisions about how to use and benefit from new technologies.  It is of course also central for providing the future scientists, engineers and technologists.

Australia is failing dismally in meeting future needs for trained scientists.  The latest OECD data show that Australia is very near the bottom in the percentage of university students studying engineering, physics and mathematics. [3]

The report [4] Sustaining science: university science in the 21^st century, by the Australian Council of Deans of Science, found that the proportion of students studying physics for any reason, not just to become physicists, has dropped to only about 33% of what it was about 20 years ago.  This led the Chair of the Deans, Professor John Rice, to comment that 'for a society participating in global economic transformation, whose competitiveness depends on riding huge waves of technological change, and whose survival depends on innovative responses to water crises, climate change, drug-resistant infection and terrorism, you'd think that a greater, not smaller, proportion of its talent needed a good understanding of basic science.'

The core of the problem lies further back: to a decrease in high school students opting to study science subjects and to a failure at primary school level to enthuse students in all things scientific.

The seriousness of the science education limitations has spurred the Academy into several endeavours.  Already in 1994, the Academy initiated a program Primary Investigations that has been widely regarded as successful, but that now is also in need of revision.  In a partnership with the Department of Education, Science and Training, this has led to the PrimaryConnections program that links the teaching of science with the teaching of literacy in primary schools.  Since the launch of the first curriculum resource units last year, more than 55,000 units have already been provided to teachers across all states, territories and jurisdictions.

Based on this success, the Academy, with DEST, is extending the model with a national pilot program for junior secondary schools, Science by Doing.  Importantly, support from participating teachers has been strong for both programs.

That the Academy of Science argues for stronger public support of basic science is unlikely to surprise you.  But we do so here, not in recognition that it keeps scientists out of mischief, but because maintenance of Australia's basic science foundation is essential to provide the core science knowledge that allows new ideas to be quickly recognised, evaluated and developed for the good of society as a whole. 

Basic science, when excellent, leads to questions that are increasingly at the boundaries of our traditional disciplines, and it leads to the new science areas for tomorrow's technologies whose names have not yet been invented.  It allows societally important questions to be addressed, such as the response to climate change, new energy solutions and the recognition and treatment of emerging diseases. 

This last case is particularly important. Paraphrasing what has been said by Ian Frazer, bird flu can reach Australia in six or seven hours.  But the development, from scratch, of an effective response may take six or seven years, unless there is a pre-existing body of basic knowledge.

There are many well-known examples in the history of science, from the transistor to the laser, where major technological developments rest on basic science that was conducted for quite unrelated purposes.   My favorite example, although minor on a global scale, was the invention of Synroc and synthetic diamonds by the late Ted Ringwood.  It is a favorite in part because it contains many lessons about the process from original clever idea to a successful commercial product. 

These new materials came out of several decades of experimentation on mantle materials at deep-earth pressures and temperatures that had led to a revolution into our understanding of the earth's interior.  I recall bringing a then Minister for Industry into Ringwood's laboratory where the latter demonstrated the powers of the new materials, only for a clearly impressed Minister to remark . but if these materials are so great, why did you waste these past decades studying the earth?

The Academy believes that Australia needs to maintain a long-term public commitment to the funding of high quality basic research in universities, across most disciplines, in order to fuel tomorrow's strategic and applied research.  The days when one could import this information in a timely fashion are becoming increasingly rare.  It does need to be recognised, that the costs of maintaining world-class research facilities rise faster than the general cost of living, and that some research directions may simply be out of the question for Australia to go it alone.  Hence the reservation 'across most disciplines' a minute ago, and the need for international collaboration to which I will return briefly later.

Also, to ensure quality, the Academy supports a research assessment process within the higher education system so long as this is a cost-effective and minimally disruptive and distortive mechanism.  One that rewards high quality work and is not used to transfer funding from basic research to shorter term applied research.

The Academy maintains its conviction that publicly funded research organisations [5] comprise an important part of Australia's innovation system.  Their role is different from, but complementary to, that of universities.  They have a clear responsibility to maintain core competencies in strategic research relevant to Australia's economic, environmental, health and industry priorities.  They also require long-term public commitment – always with the proviso of excellence in performance – and a flexibility to respond to shorter-term needs. 

I believe that to be effective a much closer integration of the research at these institutions with that at the universities is essential for the transfer of knowledge between the two.  Also, I believe that these institutions should play a greater role in education and research training in the universities.

The CRC program we consider has made an important contribution to this collaboration, including improved links with industry.  They have changed the research landscape in Australia.  But we are disappointed that the levels of funding promised in the first Backing Australia's Ability have not materialised and that public good outcomes, without a participating commercial entity, will not be considered in future rounds.  

A critical element of modern scientific research is access to major facilities such as telescopes, accelerators and specialist biological and chemical research laboratories.  In many cases these facilities are too large for Australia to go it alone and international collaboration becomes essential.  But this comes with a loss of independence and with a loss of IP. This has been recognised by Government, and the Academy applauds it, with the establishment of the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Roadmap with the approximately $500 million expenditure over five years for the first nine facilities.  (This may sound like a lot of money but annual expenditure of the program is less than what has reportedly been spent on APEC security measures. [6])

But it is important for Government to recognise that, being primarily research capabilities, some level of long-term public support will be required to maintain the facilities at the leading edge of science beyond the current funding arrangements. This is, of course equally true for our existing world-class research facilities, including the OPAL reactor and the Australian Synchrotron in >Victoria. 

The Academy strongly supports the expansion of access to international science facilities that are beyond Australia's development alone.  In this regard, the Academy applauds yesterday's announcement by the Minister for Education Science and Training that Australia, through the ARC, will become a major partner in the Integrated Ocean Drilling Project.  This will open a new future for Australian scientists in the study of the ocean floor and crust, of palaeo climate, and of the geological evolution of the planet.

The S&T future of Australia is only assured if there are outstanding scientists and engineers for the future.  Education is one part of that equation but the Academy also continues to stress that career structures for Australia's early- to mid-career researchers require urgent attention.

Overseas doctoral and post-doctoral experience for young Australian scientists plays an important role in the long-term development of international linkages and needs to be encouraged for our best and brightest.  But, other than a series of uncertain short-term postdoctoral fellowships, it is important that there are encouragements for these young scientists to return home; with remuneration, research funding and the expectation of secure employment on a par with what they enjoyed overseas.  There is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that the shortage of such positions in Australia is a deterrent to early-career researchers returning home. 

The Academy is concerned that Australia is losing many valuable post-doctoral scientists overseas in this way and has suggested a 'boomerang scheme' to attract talented young Australians back to the country before they become too settled overseas.  We believe that there is an urgent need for significantly more mid-career fellowships, especially from the ARC, than are currently available.  The model of the UK Royal Society University Research Fellowships, which provide academic salaries and research support for 8-10 years for scientists with leadership potential to build independent research careers, is an attractive one to fulfill this need.  

These are a few of the issues raised in our 2007 policy statement which I invite you to read and comment on to me through the Academy.

What horses to back?

At this point you may ask what horses do we actually back to ensure a prosperous Australia in an increasingly competitive global world? The horse metaphor is not inappropriate in view of the recent and unforseen introduction into Australia of the equine influenza that has changed the Spring Carnival dramatically and my response would be not to second-guess what may be important in 10 or so years time.

My response instead would be to focus on getting the core business of education and science right.  This will ensure that the big discoveries will continue to occur, that we will continue to win Nobel Prizes, and that the spin-offs follow.  It will ensure that the knowledge is in place when solutions to specific questions are urgently required. 

If I were pushed a bit further with the comment that Australia cannot afford to back all horses, I would respond that we back those where we still have a natural advantage.  This would include the obvious ones:

• Existing research strengths, particularly in medical areas.
• A well-developed global network of research alliances so as to access the 97% of global knowledge that we do not create.
• Research and development that is based on our mineral and energy wealth.
• Research of international significance that uses our geographic advantages. These include the southern skies for astronomy, and Antarctica and the southern ocean for climate science and oceanography.
• Innovative agricultural science and technology for food and crop production and processing.

To this I would add

• The attraction of Australia to the world's younger generation.  As an example, in a survey of the US and 15 other countries17,000 people were asked: 'Suppose a young person who wanted to leave this country asked you to recommend where to go to lead a good life – what country would you recommend?'  Those conducting the survey expected the United States to rank highly as the land of opportunity. Instead Australia and Canada clearly won the popularity stakes. [7].

Conclusion

I do not hide the fact that all recommendations in our 2007 policy statement imply a significant increased expenditure for research and development.  While the Academy acknowledges that current Government expenditure for innovation programs is at a record level of $6.5 billion, it is not keeping up with overall growth in government expenditure. Support for science and innovation as a proportion of total government expenditure will actually drop from 2.9% in 2006-07 to 2.8% in 2007-08.

It is a far cry, for example, from the US Administration's announcement of a doubling, over 10 years, of funding for innovation-enabling research in support of high-leverage fields of natural science and engineering.  For a Federal Government that has been keen to follow the policies of the US Administration, this is one area where it has not done so. 

In concluding, I hope that I have highlighted the underpinning that is required if Australian science and research is to play an important role in ensuring a prosperous Australia in an increasingly competitive world.  The Academy's 2007 Policy Statement on Research and Innovation will provide a useful roadmap in achieving this goal.

The report presents challenges for all the sectors, and in particular the national and state governments, in establishing and maintaining public-sector science and research infrastructure and capabilities and in transforming this science into public good and economic benefits.

We strongly recommend that the governments of the day takes advantage of our current healthy economic conditions to strengthen Australia's science base and to invest in the long-term future of the country by investing in its intellectual capacity.

[1] Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energising and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. ISBN: 0-309-65442-4, 590 pages (2007). www.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html. National Academy of Sciences, National  Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine

[2] Australian Government, ISBN 978 1 74037 225 1, www.pc.gov.au/study/science/docs/finalreport. March 2007.

[3] We rank 22 out of 23 OECD countries in terms of the growth in new science and engineering degrees.  OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, B.1 Flow of university graduates.  oberon.sourceoecd.org

[4] Professor John Rice, Australian Council of Deans of Science Press Release, 7 July 2007. www.acds.edu.au

[5] AIMS – Australian Institute for Marine Science; ANSTO – Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation; BoM – Bureau of Meteorology; CSIRO; DSTO – Defence Science and Technology Organisation; GA – Geoscience Australia.

[6] The Australian, 24 September 2007.

[7] Pew Global Attitudes project, Washington DC, 2005.