Delivered 9 am Wednesday 25 May 2016, Shine Dome, Canberra
E&OE: CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Australian Academy of Science President, Professor Andrew Holmes AM PresAA FRS FTSE
Fellows of the Academy, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.
Before we begin the proceedings, I would like to acknowledge and pay respect to the traditional owners of the land on which we meet—the Ngunnawal people of the Wiradjuri Nation. It is upon their ancestral lands that the Australian Academy of Science is built.
As we share our own knowledge, teaching, learning, and research practices may we also pay respect to the knowledge embedded forever within the Aboriginal Custodianship of Country.
I welcome all the new Fellows including two Corresponding Members (Professor Sir Philip Cohen Dundee elected in 2014 and Professor Matthias Hentze Heidelberg elected this year) as well as the award holders who will present their lectures this morning.
In the year since I last had the privilege of delivering this annual address, Australian science and Australian scientists have experienced a range of highs and lows. On December 7 last year, just 65 days into his Prime Ministership, the Hon Malcolm Turnbull and the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science the Hon Christopher Pyne announced the National Innovation and Science Agenda.
This ambitious policy was presented as an important first step towards a future economy based on scientific discovery and innovation, and was welcomed by the science sector with genuine excitement and enthusiasm.
Such commitments to science can be very fruitful. Bob Grubbs, who won the Chemistry Nobel Prize in the same year as Barry Marshall and Robin Warren won the Prize for Medicine/Physiology, described his scientific achievements as being a product of the ‘sputnik era.’ The Soviet Union launched the sputnik in 1957. Yuri Gagarin was the first human in space in April 1961, and on 25 May 1961 (exactly 55 years ago) President Kennedy announced the intention to place a man on the moon within a decade. The resulting commitment to investment in science and technology was the reason given by Professor Grubbs for his successful scientific career, and presumably for his nation’s prosperity.
The National Innovation and Science Agenda announced last December included many noble aspirations, with a new Cabinet committee for science and innovation chaired by the Prime Minister, and more than $1 billion in new funding for science education, for programs to promote gender equality in science and industry, and significant funding for research translation and commercialisation programs.
Of great interest to many in our sector, the package also included a commitment of $1.5 billion over ten years to support the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Scheme—NCRIS—and $520 million in new funding for the Australian Synchrotron.
Given that just nine months previously the future of the NCRIS program had been in grave doubt, the announcement was welcomed particularly by the 35,000 Australian and international researchers who use these facilities and the 1,700 highly trained staff who operate them.
After significant ups and downs, 2015 had ended on a high for scientists in the country.
However, less than two months later, some of this optimism was turned on its head with the CSIRO’s announcement of planned cuts to its oceans and atmosphere and land and water divisions; an announcement that reverberated in the media throughout Australia and the world.
On behalf of the Academy, I expressed great disappointment in the decision that appeared to have been taken, and while recognising that this was not a political decision, I did call on government to ensure that Australia retained its excellence and essential capabilities in research in climate and environmental science to meet national and international needs.
I took the opportunity to express to the Minister for Environment the Hon Greg Hunt that Australia is literally the custodian of the Southern Hemisphere in the body of climate knowledge it generates, and was heartened by his genuine willingness to listen. I am hopeful that the ongoing efforts of the Academy and others will lead to an acceptable solution.
And now, two months later again, we are approaching a federal election in which for the first time in recent memory it seems that science is on the political agenda of both major parties.
With the election in mind the Academy has launched its statement, entitled Science Priorities for an Innovative Australia.
In this statement the Academy argues that science is the engine-room of innovation, and that Australia’s future economic and social prosperity depend above all else on improving achievements through science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.
We propose that a long-term vision and stable funding for science is needed to ensure:
Within these three overarching priorities there is a need for:
The policy statement also recognises the need for targeted support to enable industry and academic researchers to engage more effectively. And we stress that innovation will quickly falter if support for the basic science that drives it is neglected or withheld.
And finally, it recognises that within the context of the National Innovation and Science Agenda, some of this work is already well underway. Under the leadership of Bill Ferris, Innovation and Science Australia has commenced an audit of the Australian innovation, science and research system that will inform the development of what is already being referred to as the 2030 Strategic Plan for science and innovation in Australia.
We appreciate that political leaders of all persuasions have shown their commitment to long-term planning and a continued focus on science in public debate.
I’ll now turn to the achievements of the Academy during a very active year.
The Academy has embarked on new projects and has sought, found and taken up diverse opportunities.
Among these is the new national education program reSolve: Mathematics by Inquiry. reSolve is a bold new program funded by government that aims to promote innovative mathematics teaching in Australian schools. The Academy is operating this program in conjunction with the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers.
This is a timely initiative, given the recent results announcing Australia’s declining performance in maths and other subjects in comparison with standards in other countries (I refer here to the PISA tests).
We have sustained our commitments to growing and developing our primary school program, Primary Connections, with new course modules and development opportunities for pre-service and working teachers. Thanks to philanthropic support this year for the first time we have also been able to offer professional development to teachers from remote and disadvantaged schools.
This past year we’ve also proudly completed all the modules for our secondary school science education program, Science by Doing, whose number of users has grown exponentially.
And we’ve launched a new phase for our long-standing public education and explainer website, Nova—with the support of a generous donation from Telstra we have completely refreshed and redeveloped Nova, which is reaching new audiences daily with the wonder of science and igniting curiosity in the world around us.
Our other new program—a joint initiative between the Academy of Science and the Academy of Technology and Engineering—is the Science in Australia Gender Equity—or SAGE—Initiative that has been established to improve gender equality in Australian universities and other research organisations.
It is doing so by piloting the Athena SWAN Charter in 32 Australian universities, medical research institutes and other publicly funded research organisations, with an intention of expanding the program to accommodate all Australian research organisations over the coming years.
For those of you unfamiliar with Athena Swan this is a program that was developed in the UK and has been operating there for over ten years. It offers research institutions and individual departments the opportunity to apply for accreditation at bronze, silver and gold levels to encourage and recognise commitment to advancing the careers of women in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine (STEMM) employment in higher education and research.
The SAGE pilot was launched at Parliament House in September last year, just after we had formalised the partnership with ATSE, and I’d like to express my thanks to our new Chief Scientist and former President of ATSE, Dr Alan Finkel, for his support in helping to instigate and finalise this partnership.
I’m also delighted that the SAGE Initiative was given a significant boost from Government with funding under the National Innovation and Science Agenda to support expansion of the program in a shorter timeframe than would otherwise have been possible. The program is in the process of engaging with those 32 institutions who have signed up, and plans are in hand to strengthen the administration with the appointment of an Executive Director.
This year by rotation I have assumed the Presidency of the Australian Council of Learned Academies—or ACOLA. This organisation was established after a review of the original National Academies’ Forum, but it received its greatest boost when the former Chief Scientist Professor Ian Chubb arranged funding of $10 million to enable the four learned academies jointly to develop policy and foresight documents on multidisciplinary topics of interest to government under the collective title Securing Australia’s Future.
This program was modelled on the long-standing operations of the US National Research Council (the research arm of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine) in the development of scientific reports for government on matters of public policy.
We are coming to the end of this program with some thirteen reports produced by ACOLA, and are now planning how the organisation will proceed. We will aim to have commissioned up to three major reports per annum in areas that have a defined end user in government or other parts of civil society.
A feature of the Securing Australia’s Future reports has been the inter-disciplinary nature of the work, engaging Fellows from all four learned academies who can provide expert views on particular topics drawing on the knowledge of the experts, and where appropriate, using commissioned research to provide a collective body of information which is used and analysed in the report.
This model has worked well. The Academy of Science managed the preparation of a substantial report on Technology and Australia’s Future chaired by Professor Bob Williamson (of Data 61 and ANU) and Professor Rob Evans (from the University of Melbourne). Launched in September, the report raised powerful arguments about the importance of technology in driving new jobs and growth (do these words sound familiar?).
This theme will continue as we inform government and society on developing the National Innovation and Science Agenda. Another Securing Australia’s Future report—Skills and Capabilities for Australian Enterprise Innovation—is highly relevant in recognising features that can be identified with successful companies in a modern innovative society, while a Review of Australia’s Research Training System, commissioned by the Department of Education and Training and jointly managed by this Academy and the Academy of Technology and Engineering, has much to say about the need to align research training more effectively with industrial research needs.
Finally, the work of all the projects will be drawn together in a synthesis volume that will cluster various projects and try to draw out some common threads. The summaries of these projects will also be available in attractive brochure form for distribution to individuals in various environments including meetings with politicians or for casual visitors to the Academy.
One of the reasons that I devoted some considerable time to the mention of ACOLA and the Securing Australia’s Future program is that an external review of the work instigated by the ACOLA Council concluded that ACOLA could promote more effectively the existence of the SAF reports through our own Academy Fellows. As we draw to the phase of preparing a final report for ARC I hope you will make time to read these reports.
We note with some satisfaction that the introduction of funding for multilateral international scientific collaborations has been provided under the recently announced National Innovation and Science Agenda, and that the Academy will play a significant part in assisting with the administration of these programs. I welcome a group of six Brazilian PhD students who have been in Australia for the last few weeks under the auspices of the Academy to undertake research projects with a number of Australian host institutions.
As I noted earlier, a particularly widely debated topic has been the decision of CSIRO to reduce its activities in the area of climate science and environmental research. Many Fellows have been keen to see the Academy take strong action on this decision. While I expressed great disappointment in the decisions that appear to have been taken, I do not believe it is appropriate to dictate to CSIRO how their operations are prioritised. I am reminded of some wise words that have stayed with me. You may have heard this yourself: “If you have to shout at them you have lost the battle”.
I took the view that what really matters is that Australia can continue to deliver the basic scientific knowledge to understand, mitigate and accommodate the effects of the change in climate imposed by anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. I was privileged to attend the conference CSIRO Greenhouse 2015: Atmosphere, oceans and ice in Hobart last October and was most impressed with the high quality of atmospheric physics and chemistry, glaciology, Antarctic research, oceanography, ecology and social science that is conducted in Australia.
This is a jewel in the crown of Australia’s knowledge base, and generation of excellent knowledge must be sustained and nurtured. I learnt that Australia is literally custodian of the Southern Hemisphere in the body of knowledge that it generates and in the discharge of its international obligations.
I support those who are speaking out loudly against reductions in investment in these areas of science. I also believe the Academy’s proper role is to work constructively with government and civil society to identify our needs and capabilities and to propose effective approaches to generate solutions to these requirements.
It is with this in mind that I proposed to Minister Hunt and the Chief Scientist that the Australian Academy of Science would conduct an assessment and review of the needs and capabilities in the area of climate science. The Minister and the Department of Environment welcomed this offer.
The review will be headed by Professor Trevor McDougall. It will determine which of Australia’s current climate science capabilities are critical to the national interest, and explore the capabilities that will need to be maintained or developed into the future. Between them, members of the committee have expertise from the Bureau of Meteorology, the CSIRO, international research hubs including the Hadley Centre in the UK and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in the USA, the Victorian Centre for Climate Adaptation Research and considerable expertise in university climate research.
However, I do understand that the needs are much broader and that an assessment of scientific knowledge and the provision of scientific advice in Australia by Australians for Australia is essential. This knowledge and advice must take into account the harsh and arid environment of our continent in the areas of ecology, evolution and sustainability. It is with this in mind that I am hoping that the Australian Council of Learned Academies will be invited to provide a comprehensive “deep dive” assessment of the issues needed to deliver the appropriate knowledge and scientific capability in the area of the Science and Research Priority “Environmental Change”. In the meantime I continue to maintain a dialogue with the Chief Scientist and CSIRO on these most important matters.
Much of the debate about the need for research into climate science and the environment falls under the general subject of ‘science for the public good.’
In a number of conversations with Fellows who are concerned about this aspect of the nation’s science base I consider that it would be timely to propose that a national debate be held on this topic.
I started to do some reading on the topic and came across a publication by the US National Academies Press [The Role of Scientific and Technical Data and Information in the Public Domain: Proceedings of a Symposium (2003)] with a chapter entitled ‘Scientific Knowledge as a Global Public Good: Contributions to Innovation and the Economy.’ The authors argued that the notion of “public goods” is not new, although it has less often been strongly associated with the natural sciences.
Traditionally the acquisition of basic scientific knowledge has been the preserve of the public sector whereas the private sector has been more associated with applied research. We can all think of modern examples of knowledge for the public good related for example to high energy physics and cosmology as well as understanding control of disease, whereas an important applied focus of the public sector has been the improvement of agricultural production. It is against this background that CSIR (later CSIRO) was founded in 1926 (initially as the Advisory Council for Science and Industry in 1916).
Much of the scientific and technological advances in developed countries has been accelerated by military need, particularly in wartime. This just emphasises that the interpretation of the words ‘public good’ is still strongly influenced by society in general as the end users. The use of DDT as an insecticide in controlling the spread of malaria is another example of the ambiguity of the interpretation of what constitutes ‘the public good.’ Alongside this sits the concept of protection of intellectual property that is probably aimed directly at a national benefit that provides an incentive for individuals and entities.
The age of industrial enlightenment followed by the huge advances in scientific and technical knowledge in the period from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century afforded the opportunity to harness the knowledge in effective ways through the formation of national (and private) laboratories. It was only during this period that the collective ability and techniques to acquire knowledge and harness it for economic gain became a compelling necessity.
The justification of the added economic benefit to our nation’s economy through worldwide investment in the physical, biological and mathematical sciences has been convincingly demonstrated in the Academy’s recent publication The importance of advanced physical, mathematical and biological sciences to the Australian economy (2015).
Working with the Office of the Chief Scientist and the Centre for International Economics, we showed in this report that global advances in basic physical, mathematical and biological sciences over the past 30 years directly and indirectly underpin one quarter of Australia’s economic output.
It is clear that public investment in our national science laboratories is valuable to the economy. But we know that it is also extremely valuable for the acquisition of new knowledge, surely one of the most important activities of civilisation.
I now turn to recognise the enormous strides that the Academy has made over the last eight years under the leadership of Dr Sue Meek, our Chief Executive. I am very sad that Sue has decided to step down. I am constantly reminded of how much she has initiated that needs to be sustained. In doing so we shall have to learn to soldier on in her absence until her successor is appointed, a task that is well in hand. May I publicly thank you Sue for everything you have done for the Academy. Your dedication to getting everything working properly, your attention to detail and your personal investment are known to the Fellows and indeed well beyond the walls of the Shine Dome. We wish you much happiness and fulfilment in the next phase of your career.
Ladies and gentlemen, this brings me to the end of my address for the Annual Meeting 2016. Thank you very much.
© 2024 Australian Academy of Science
