Australian scientists are on the verge of answering humanity’s biggest questions about our cosmic origins and whether we’re alone in the universe.

But for Australia to remain at the forefront of astronomy research and discovery, our nation’s astronomers need access to the next generation of world-leading mega telescopes, including the next generation 30m class telescopes, and 8m class telescope capabilities.

The Chair of the Australian Academy of Science’s National Committee for Astronomy, Professor Virginia Kilborn, said one way this could be achieved is through membership of the European Southern Observatory (ESO), an intergovernmental organisation of 16 member states.

The recommendation is included in the Academy’s new 10-year plan for astronomy being launched today in Adelaide at the annual meeting of Australia’s astronomers.

“Australia’s astronomy instrumentation program is thriving and engagement with industry is expanding with astronomy applications in diverse areas including medicine, defence, mining and more,” said Professor Kilborn, who is also a radio astronomer and the Chief Scientist at Swinburne University of Technology.

“These achievements are in part due to smart Australian investment in strategic international partnerships, including the ESO and the Square Kilometre Array Observatory (SKAO).

“Mega-telescopes of the coming decade are so large that they go beyond any single-nation effort. Within this interlinked research environment, Australia has a major role to play.”

The recommendation for Australia to become a full member of the ESO is among nine priorities in the plan. Other priorities in the plan include:

• capitalising on Australia’s engagement with SKAO
• building Australian capacity including strengthening access to high-performance computing, data and software
• building connections with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander astronomy
• promoting dark and radio-quiet skies in Australia.

Professor Kilborn said the plan also highlights how Australia’s astronomy workforce is delivering value for the nation, from making fundamental scientific discoveries to developing technology and data science capability and growing a high-tech workforce.

“Importantly, this decadal plan is the first time Australia’s astronomy community has focused on and incorporated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander astronomy.

“We hope this new plan inspires Australians, connects them to our collective endeavour to answer our deepest questions about the cosmos and empowers a new generation of STEM superstars.”

Read the Astronomy decadal plan 2026–2035

The Academy acknowledges the financial support provided by CSIRO, Australia’s national science agency, and the late Professor Michael Dopita AM FAA to develop this plan.

About the cover artwork

The artwork on the decadal plan’s cover is Seven Sisters (2024) by Noeleen Hamlett, Wajarri Yamaji. The artwork is part of the Cosmic Echoes: Shared Sky Indigenous Art Exhibition, which is an SKAO initiative, in collaboration with SARAO, CSIRO and the Wajarri Yamaji Aboriginal Corporation.

The Australian Academy of Science is leading Australia’s efforts to attract top US scientific talent Down Under. The call for applications is now open.

Academy President Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC said the Academy was proud to be nationally coordinating the recruitment of leading US scientists and Australians returning home.

“There has been strong interest among US based scientists since the Academy announced the establishment of the Global Talent Attraction Program in April, the first of its kind in Australia,” Professor Jagadish said.

“We are now calling for formal applications from both Australian and non-Australian citizens based in the US whose work is internationally recognised as exceptional.”

The Academy’s candidate merit pool is institution- and discipline-agnostic, with an initial focus on candidates relocating from the United States.

The Academy has designed a comprehensive and competitive relocation package which includes research funding, access to Australian research infrastructure, family relocation support and visa acceleration.

Professor Jagadish said the Academy was looking for outstanding candidates who want to join a strong and stable research environment and make a valuable, lasting contribution to Australian research and innovation.

Applicants are expected to be of high calibre demonstrating scientific or technological excellence. They should demonstrate capacity to contribute to and elevate Australia’s global research reputation through placements in long-term, funded positions with an Australian research organisation.

Applicants must also have a strong track record in mentoring early- and mid-career researchers, and a commitment to fostering the next generation of scientific talent and creating inclusive, high-performing teams benefitting Australia and the world.

The closing date for Round 1 applications is 29 August 2025.

More information on candidate eligibility and the application process.

Australian Academy of Science President Professor Chennupati Jagadish and Head of International Affairs Nancy Pritchard recently joined Academy Fellows and Australian experts in Beijing for high-level discussions on environmental collaboration and shared conservation priorities.

The Australia-China Workshop on Environmental Protection and Biodiversity was organised by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Australian Academy of Science.

The event brought together six leading Australian biodiversity and conservation experts, including distinguished researchers from Charles Darwin University, James Cook University, Griffith University, the University of Sydney, and the Australian National University.   

Academy Fellow Professor Alan Andersen from Charles Darwin University was Australian co-convenor and delegation leader.

Professor Linxiu Zhang, Director of the United Nations Environment Programme-International Ecosystems Management Partnership, served as Chinese co-convenor.

The workshop program covered four key themes: terrestrial biodiversity and conservation; river basin management and freshwater biodiversity; marine ecosystem and coastal protection; and climate change and biodiversity conservation.

The workshop showcased existing links between Chinese and Australian researchers across institutions, including CSIRO and the Australian National University.

Discussions centred on researcher mobility, funding mechanisms and shared scientific priorities, with participants agreeing to pursue further collaboration to develop joint project proposals.

Professor Jagadish said China’s commitment to biodiversity research and conservation is clear.

“The scale of its conservation actions, particularly their long-term monitoring programs, have no parallel in Australia,” Professor Jagadish said.

“There is certainly potential for Australian Chinese research collaboration in areas including migratory shorebirds, plastic ingestion in birds, restoration efforts and research on the biosphere and hydrosphere.”

The visit also included tours of research facilities, such as the Earth System Numerical Simulation Facility, EarthLab and the Supercomputing Facility at the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Atmospheric Physics.

A sustainability researcher nominated by the Australian Academy of Science has been awarded an international science prize worth A$1.5 million at a ceremony in Switzerland.

Associate Professor Arunima Malik of the University of Sydney has been named one of three international champions of the 2025 Frontiers Planet Prize, a prestigious award recognising research with the most promising potential to keep humanity within planetary boundaries.

Professor Zahra Kalantari from Sweden and Dr Zia Mehrabi from the USA also received the 2025 Frontiers Planet Prize.

The Frontiers Planet Prize, awarded by the not-for-profit Frontiers Research Foundation, is the world’s largest science prize in scientific solutions for planetary health, offering US$1 million to each of the three international champions.

The award ceremony took place on 17 June 2025 at the Villars Symposium in Villars-sur-Ollon, Switzerland.

Associate Professor Malik’s winning paper, ‘Polarising and equalising trends in international trade and Sustainable Development Goals’, was published in Nature Sustainability and underscores the significant global implications of trade on sustainability.

Associate Professor Malik’s interdisciplinary research employs big-data modelling to assess the social, economic and environmental impacts embedded in global supply chains.

Her work reveals that while international trade can drive economic growth, it also often shifts environmental and social burdens to lower-income nations, exacerbating global inequalities.

This research challenges traditional models by highlighting the uneven distribution of trade-related benefits and costs.

Interdisciplinary collaboration

“The year 2030 is fast approaching, but many targets for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals remain out of reach. Our work on cross-border effects sheds light on multiple interconnected factors that influence the Goals,” Associate Professor Malik said of her research.

“This award is a testament to the successful interdisciplinary collaboration across multiple institutions and reflects the commitment of all authors in realising this important research. I thank Professor Manfred Lenzen, Dr Mengyu Li, Camille Mora, Dr Sarah Carter, Dr Stefan Giljum, Dr Stephan Lutter and Professor Jorge Gomez-Paredes for their valuable contributions.

“This award is a stepping stone for putting research on cross-border impacts on the global agenda, and to further strengthen collaborations with international organisations and networks working to drive progress towards sustainable development,” Associate Professor Malik said.

The Australian Academy of Science nominated Associate Professor Malik’s research for the Frontiers Prize. In April, she was named as Australia’s National Champion for the prize, alongside the national champions of 18 other countries.

President of the Australian Academy of Science Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC commended Associate Professor Malik’s achievement.

“This recognition underscores the global significance of Australian research in addressing critical sustainability challenges,” Professor Jagadish said.

“Professor Malik’s work exemplifies the impact of science in shaping a more equitable and sustainable future.”

As an international champion, Associate Professor Malik joins a distinguished network of researchers committed to advancing planetary health.

Find out more about the Frontiers Planet Prize and its initiatives.

Professor Lloyd Hollenberg has been awarded the 2025 Lloyd Rees Lecture by the Australian Academy of Science in the International Year of Quantum Science and Technology.

A Fellow of the Academy, Professor Hollenberg leads the University of Melbourne’s IBM Quantum Hub – a large team of academics and graduate researchers testing notions of quantum computing on state-of-the-art hardware.

His work focuses on rigorously testing the capabilities of these emerging quantum systems to determine if, how, and when they can outperform classical computers for practical applications.

Beyond pushing the boundaries of the technology itself, Professor Hollenberg is also dedicated to democratising access to this complex field through the development of teaching tools designed to introduce quantum computing concepts to secondary school students.

“I am delighted and honoured to be awarded the opportunity to deliver the 2025 Lloyd Rees Lecture,” Professor Hollenberg said.

“In particular, I am looking forward to speaking on behalf of many outstanding students, postdocs and colleagues I have been fortunate to work with in quantum computing, including on applications in chemistry.”

In his talk, Professor Hollenberg will give an update on the state of the field of quantum computing, and the direction in which the field is heading.

The Lloyd Rees Lecture series honours the significant contributions of the late Dr. A.L.G. Rees FAA to science, industry and education by inviting distinguished chemical physics researchers to present their work.

The Lloyd Rees Lecture will be held on 6 November 2025 at 2.30pm in the Wark Theatre at CSIRO in Clayton, Victoria.

Registrations will open on the Academy’s website closer to the event date.

Find out more about the Lloyd Rees Lecture.

Find out more about the International Year of Quantum Science and Technology.

A new Sydney ferry has been named in honour of Ruby Payne-Scott – an Australian pioneer in radio physics and astronomy and outspoken advocate for women’s rights.

Academy Fellow Professor Nalini Joshi – a world-renown mathematician and recipient of the Academy’s own Ruby Payne-Scott Medal – represented the Academy at the launch ceremony, held on Sydney Harbour at Barangaroo Wharf.

Professor Joshi, who is the Payne-Scott Professor at the University of Sydney, drew on Ruby’s foundational contributions to radio astronomy and the systemic discrimination Ruby faced as Australia’s first female radio astronomer.

True passion

“Ruby was already attending the University of Sydney at the age of 16, and just a few years later, became only the third woman to graduate in physics from that institution,” Professor Joshi said in her speech.

“During the Second World War, Ruby was hired as a librarian by Amalgamated Wireless Australasia. She used this position to find her way into her true passion in research, turning her position into a full-time role as a physicist.

“In 1941, she joined the CSIR Division of Radiophysics, where she made her greatest scientific contributions. From 1944 to 1951, Ruby helped lay the very foundations of radio astronomy—a whole new way of seeing the universe.

“She helped uncover how the sun sends out bursts of radio energy and developed instruments that could ‘film’ solar explosions in real time.

“Her work enabled Australia to become a world leader in this field.”

More than a scientist

But, Professor Joshi said, Ruby was more than a scientist – she was an advocate for women’s rights at a time when doing so came at great personal cost.

“She questioned why women couldn't wear shorts while climbing radio towers, why they weren’t paid equally, why they were forced to resign upon marriage or pregnancy.

“Ruby didn’t win every battle. In fact, she was forced out of her role after expecting her second child, ending her scientific career far too early at the age of 39.

“But the stands she took helped shift the conversation – and eventually, the policies – that had kept women out of science.”

The ferry’s naming aims to encourage girls and women to consider a STEM career, and is a proud tribute to Ruby’s excellence and perseverance.

The seven new Parramatta River Class ferries, replacing the 30-year-old RiverCats, are named after notable Australians who have made significant contributions to science, culture and the community. Five of these vessels have so far entered service:

• Associate Professor Isobel Bennett – celebrating Isobel Bennett, a pioneering marine biologist known for her work on Australian seashores
• Frances Bodkin – named after Frances Bodkin, a respected D’harawal elder, botanist and educator
• Professor Martin Green FAA – named after Professor Martin Green AM FAA FTSE FRS, a leading figure in solar energy research and development
• Dr John Nutt – honouring John Nutt for his lead role in the construction of the Sydney Opera House
• Ruby Payne-Scott – honouring one of Australia’s first female radio astronomers and a trailblazer for women in science.

President of the Australian Academy of Science Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC has welcomed new office holders and members of the Academy’s Council.

Professor Margaret Sheil AO begins her role as the Academy’s Secretary for Science Policy, succeeding Professor Ian Chubb AC.

Professor Sheil has been Vice-Chancellor of QUT since February 2018 and is also Chair of the Queensland Museum Network and lead Vice-Chancellor for Research for Universities Australia. She was elected a Fellow of the Academy in 2021.

Professor Barbara Nowak begins her role as the Academy’s Treasurer, succeeding Professor Marilyn Anderson AO.

Professor Nowak is Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania and Honorary Professor at RMIT University. She was also elected a Fellow of the Academy in 2021.

“I would like to thank Ian and Marilyn for their significant contribution to the Council and continuing support of the Academy’s strategic objectives,” Professor Jagadish said.

“I also welcome the election of Professors Joanne Etheridge, Jennifer Martin AC and Jamie Rossjohn to the Academy’s Council, and thank outgoing members Professors Julian Gale, Colin Raston and David Bowtell.”

Find out more about the Academy’s Council members.

ABC Radio National Breakfast – Changing Australia: Anna-Maria Arabia and bringing better science to the justice system

TOPICS: Kathleen Folbigg and creating a more science-aware justice system. Broadcast on Tuesday 27 May 2025

Sally Sara: Well, at the end of 2023 New South Wales woman Kathleen Folbigg fronted a big media pack after spending 20 years in prison over the deaths of her four children – the New South Wales Court of Appeal quashed her conviction.

Kathleen Folbigg (recording): I am grateful that updated science and genetics has given me answers as to how my children died. However, even in 1999 we had legal answers to prove my innocence. They were ignored and dismissed.

Sally Sara: You might remember some of those news pictures. Well, standing beside Kathleen Folbigg that day was Anna-Maria Arabia, the head of the Australian Academy of Science. The Academy was eventually brought into the case as an independent scientific adviser. It said basic scientific principles were not adhered to from the start of Kathleen Folbigg’s trial, but today, Anna-Maria Arabia says the major reforms urgently needed to avoid other miscarriages of justice still have not been put in place. Anna-Maria Arabia, the Chief Executive of the Australian Academy of Science, is my guest today. Anna-Maria, welcome to Changing Australia. It’s lovely to be with you; it’s good to have you in the studio. In the time since Kathleen Folbigg was released, do you think that the courts have improved the way that they apply and interpret science to the cases that need it?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Sally, I think the short answer to that is no, unfortunately, there is a great need to bring about changes to our justice system so that it is more science sensitive. That certainly takes time. And one of the barriers we have, is that justice systems are usually in the remit of states and territories. And of course, there’s an overarching system federally, and therefore to bring about change right across Australia takes concerted effort across the nation in a jurisdictional sense. It also takes time, because science is evolving quickly. New knowledge is generated daily, and for system change to happen, they need to be able to recognise that and change accordingly, so that they’re able to accept science in a range of different circumstances. So I don't pretend it would happen overnight, but I would like to have seen the Kathleen Folbigg case trigger some review of things like the Evidence Act and other measures that we might have looked at to see how we can create a more science-sensitive system.

Sally Sara: And if we’re standing back and looking at the Kathleen Folbigg case in particular, was it that that science didn’t exist at the time, or that science existed but it wasn’t taken account of?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Yes, so the science that ultimately saw her inquiry come to life certainly didn’t exist at the time of her conviction, so the genetic mutations that Kathleen Folbigg and her daughters held could not have been known in 2003 when she was convicted. It did exist in 2019 at her first inquiry, but it was not well heard. The range of experts that were brought to bear at that inquiry were not necessarily the best experts in their field, and so those last three years, from 2019 to when she was released, really, the science was known then, but the system was not created or working in a way that enabled that science to be heard and to deliver justice for Kathleen and certainly others.

Sally Sara: Each profession and each institution has its own culture. It has its own language, reason for existing and priorities. What’s it like dealing with the legal system coming from a scientific perspective?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Sometimes it’s like two people from different planets trying to talk to each other, and that doesn't mean they don’t want to understand each other. I think there’s a couple of principles here. So in science communication, it is really important to be able to communicate science in a way that engages audiences, and in this case, it’s a legal system. But equally, we as scientists, we need to be really conscious of how we communicate to members of the public, to legislators, parliamentarians, policy makers – and each of those requires nuance and sophisticated communication. But each profession, the legal system and the science system, the professionals in those systems, bring their best to their professions. There’ s no doubt in my mind about that when you have emerging science, it’s unfair to think a judge or jury could be an amateur scientist or be able to get across that, so we need to find mechanisms to enable the communication of science across those two audiences. And equally, it’s really difficult for a scientist who is used to exploring the grey, putting certainty and uncertainty measures around the evidence that they generate, for them to be able to understand a system that’s looking for finality, that might be more black and white, where cross-examination asks for yes–no answers. Scientists don’t often do yes–no. They seek to explain the nuance and the grey. So it is difficult for those two systems to come together, but not impossible, and there’s ways we can improve that.

Sally Sara: I’m wondering whether reputation is also an issue. A scientist might know that this science is proven, but do they worry about their reputation going into court to give evidence on a particular aspect of science?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Absolutely, the scientists who have been expert witnesses with whom I’ve spoken, they speak about the great integrity they bring to that process, the real desire to be the best professional they can be, and to explain something completely, and then feel a little bit let down and cornered when they’re asked a yes–no question. So it does go to reputation. It also goes to the court – the courts being adversarial, and I understand it’s an adversarial system, as it should be. It’s not really an environment where scientists, I think, feel most comfortable bringing their expertise, albeit quite accustomed to controversy and people critiquing their work, being sceptical about their work. That’s quite normal within their scientific community. But when the opportunity to convey science in its completeness in a fulsome way, is denied – at least that’s how they feel – I think there are real difficulties in bringing those two professions together.

Sally Sara: How and why did you become involved in the Kathleen Folbigg case?

Anna-Maria Arabia: The Australian Academy of Science, like many academies across the world and the Royal Society of London and the National Academy of Science in the US, have been involved in science law matters for quite a while. The Kathleen Folbigg case was a very interesting and I think unique manifestation for the Academy of Science to bring evidence to decision-making. We do that all the time. We bring evidence to this parliament. We try and convey evidence wherever decisions are made, but it was one of our Fellows, the extraordinary Professor Carola Vinuesa, who undertook the genetic analysis of Kathleen and her children, and she was an expert witness in the first inquiry in 2019, and she very, very strongly felt that the scientific knowledge and understanding that she held had not been heard in that legal setting. And quite frustrated, she came to the Academy of Science looking for an august institution that had some weight to be able to make the case. And we looked closely at this, and Sally, to be honest, when we first looked at it, it’s like ‘are you sure Carola, you know, you’ve understood this completely?’ We have great faith in our justice system in Australia, and so we questioned it as we should have. And actually, as we looked closer, it became really clear that there had been many missteps in that case. And so we became involved in it and eventually were appointed as the independent scientific advisor to the second inquiry. And that’s something that I don’t think has happened anywhere in the world. And for me, was an illustration of how we can create a more science-sensitive legal system, and the benefit of having an independent body come to that setting and make recommendations. So, it wasn’t a decision-making role, but to be able to say to the justice system, here are the right experts in this very particular field you’re looking at. Here are some of the questions you might ask of them, so you can get the most clear understanding of this situation, and then you make your decision from that point on. But at least you have available then, you have in front of you, the best available expert evidence from the most qualified experts. So that was a unique role. And one I’m really proud of.

Sally Sara: In addition to the legal process, you know, Kathleen Folbigg is, is an individual. What was it like for you, your colleagues and others to convey this information to Kathleen Folbigg: ‘this is what we’ve found’.

Anna-Maria Arabia: We didn’t play that role, that went via her solicitor. But Kathleen, today, as a free woman, talks about receiving the genetic analysis, her own genetic analysis and that of her children as a very freeing moment. For her it gave her an understanding of why her children died. So she had grieved her children, been imprisoned for murdering them, knowing that she was innocent. So, the science wasn’t just the pathway to her freedom, but she speaks about it as a pathway to her resolving her grief for her children, and to understanding the sort of mutations that they had and then using that to potentially help other families as well. So, I think the science played a really important role in her emotional state and her psychological ability to to deal with this extraordinary trauma that she had been through.

Sally Sara: Kathleen Folbigg’s case is an incredible example of when things go wrong, but also the way that science can be applied once it emerges, and deliver more evidence. What else is happening in this interaction between science and law now with the lessons that were learned from Kathleen Folbigg’s case and from other experiences as well?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Yeah, so Kathleen’s case has received international attention. I was recently in London speaking about it actually, and there are legislators across the world who are looking at it, to look at ways in which they can improve their justice systems and the better delivery of justice. Some of the things we’ve been working on, taking the learnings from the Kathleen Folbigg case, is how do we have as a matter of routine the independent selection of experts. So at the moment, prosecution and defence select their experts and then they’re cross-examined. They are limited by the reach of prosecution and defence. If you had the independent selection of experts they could be offered to the justice system and then cross-examined by prosecution and defence, and that would enable the best possible experts to be there. Things like the Evidence Act, I think it’s probably time that the Evidence Act be reviewed. There are reliability standards that are within that act, there is a question to be asked about whether that’s still fit for purpose. So as you have new science and new technologies emerging, and you’re looking at those, we need to be able to run a ruler over evidence before it is admitted into a court of law asking whether it’s reliable, and reliable from a scientific perspective as well. There’s really interesting work and calls we’ve been part of, to have genome sequencing done of all causes of so we can investigate causes of death where they are unknown particularly in children. So imagine families who have lost children, cannot explain their death, have the finger pointed at them, or even don’t have the finger pointed at them. They end up in the Coroner’s Court. There is no great understanding of what’s caused that death. Imagine being able to sequence those genomes and have an understanding before any criminal proceedings or any sort of court proceedings even start – that would give great comfort to parents. It would help parents avail themselves to things like genetic counselling and IVF that would enable them to have healthy children going forward. It would add to the body of evidence to help us understand disease. Those sort of measures don’t just help the justice system; they help families, they help science. They would be terrific things we could introduce as learnings from the Kathleen Folbigg case.

Sally Sara: You’re listening to Changing Australia and my guest this morning is the head of the Australian Academy of Science, Anna-Maria Arabia. Now that there is a greater look at incorporating science and scientific expertise and evidence into the justice system, I’m wondering about other issues. We know that, for example, amongst the prison population there is a proliferation of people who’ve had significant head or brain injuries, and there’s a lot of discussion about criminal responsibility with that. What sort of other applications do you see for not only experts testifying in cases, but a rethink of the way that we deal with questions of justice and questions of science?

Anna-Maria Arabia: It’s huge. So that’s one example. Think about climate change litigation, which is in our courts already, where the underpinning science around climate change is brought into those legal settings. Think about the use of AI. Think about autonomous vehicles and where responsibility lies when things go wrong. These are all advances in science and technology, and these are within the courts and within our justice system more broadly. We need mechanisms to be able to deal with this, so it requires the justice system to be more scientifically literate. It also requires the science system to be more literate of how the law works. So, there’s a mutual responsibility there. But there are a number of challenges facing our legal system. This isn’t new though; it’s not beyond our wit to be able to do this. I remember when I was a young scientist, my supervisor at the time was called to be an expert witness, and he was explaining to me that he needed to provide evidence as to whether stress caused cardiovascular conditions, and whether somebody who had had a heart attack and whether their work environment contributed to that. It was very grey at the time, and the courts were trying to deal with this, and there was a lot of litigation. That’s the same principle at play equally. The ones I’ve just mentioned are now examples nowadays. We’ll see many emerge with quantum computing. We’ll see many emerge as science continues. So again, we really need a legal system that’s fit for purpose and able to evolve and work with new knowledge as it comes to life and influences the way we all engage in society and some of the matters that emerge in a legal sense.

Sally Sara: Anna-Maria, coming full circle, back to where we began. I’m wondering, personally and professionally, what are the biggest things that you learnt from your involvement in the Kathleen Folbigg case?

Anna-Maria Arabia: It was an extraordinary experience, personally, to look at a case, a criminal case so closely that involved a grieving mother who has gone through an unimaginable amount of grief and injustice, and to be able to bring science to bear to that was extraordinary. One of the things that drives me every day is, how do I bring evidence to decision-making? And I know that sounds really kind of transactional, but this is where the rubber hits the road. This is where it affects lives, where we can look at systems and structures. And [to] help in this case, the delivery of justice, for me was an enormously proud moment to be able to convene the wonderful scientists in our country and indeed internationally; in the case of Kathleen Folbigg – to bring them to the justice system to bear witness to the communication of science in that courtroom, which Sally I would argue, was the most sophisticated engagement between the justice system and the science system I’d ever seen. The Commissioner, Bathurst, was fully engaged in this complete explanation of science and the mutations that Kathleen holds and her children hold, and why they’re important in a way that was not superficial, that brought about understanding. It was evidence-informed decision making at its very best. And for me, it was an example of what this could look like and how an organisation like the Australian Academy of Science can really be brought to bear to help individuals, to help systems. It was a very proud moment.

Sally Sara: Anna-Maria Arabia, it’s been so interesting to talk to you about your work and the applications of this kind of work as well. Thank you so much for being my guest this morning on Changing Australia.

Anna-Maria Arabia: It’s such a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.

Listen to this interview on the ABC website.

This is the transcript of a speech that the Australian Academy of Science President, Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC delivered at the Chinese Academy of Sciences on 31 May 2025.

Hello and nǐhǎo everyone.

Thank you, Professor Jianguo Hou, for your presentation.

I am delighted to be here for this important event.

It’s wonderful to see so many leaders from national academies and international scientific organisations in the room.

That speaks to the convening power of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

CASAD’s 70th anniversary

I’d like to acknowledge a special milestone tomorrow – the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the Academic Divisions of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

The establishment of CASAD was described as “the beginning of a new stage in the development of China’s scientific undertaking”.

The establishment of the Australian Academy of Science one year earlier, in 1954, also signalled a new era for Australian science.

Seventy-one years later we gather to discuss the future of the planet. And it is in danger – the science revealing this is unambiguous and compelling.

For years, scientists across the world have been warning of the growing evidence of collapsing global ecosystems, biodiversity loss, the damage to natural resources and their decline, and the rise and mobility of diseases due to the changing climate.

Today, the very architecture and nature of the global research system required to respond to these challenges is also at stake.

There are local challenges which each country’s scientists will need to solve, but the global challenges are different: bigger, more complex and political.

They require global solutions, with researchers and countries working together.

But I’ll return to this theme a little later.

First, I wanted to touch on the strong foundation of scientific collaboration established between China and Australia over many years.

Personal reflections

This is my 50th visit to China. My first was in 1995 to help establish a collaboration between my university – the Australian National University – and the Shanghai Institute of Technical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

The aim was to better understand the optical qualities of tiny semiconductor nanocrystals, known as quantum dots.

It wasn’t only senior scientists involved in this collaboration, but also postdocs and students. To me, this exemplifies ‘inclusive collaboration’ at the micro level.

Of course, collaboration between our two countries began many years before my first visit to China.

My colleague and Academy Fellow, Professor Sue O’Reilly, led Australia’s first petrological-geological delegation to China in 1982.

The Xinhua News Agency said recently with all of Sue’s visits over the years, she probably knows more about the geo-structure of China than many Chinese.

Country to country engagement

The scientific partnerships between our two countries have also been occurring at the macro level for many years.

The Australian Academy of Science and the Chinese Academy of Sciences have been collaborating in bilateral activities since 1978.

In 1980 our two academies signed a memorandum of understanding that covered an exchange program that continued until 2011.

More than 600 scientists from each side benefited from this program that led to extensive ongoing relationships and collaborative activities and projects.   

Between 2004 and 2023 we forged strong links through the annual bilateral symposia between our two academies and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering.    

And next week, CAS and the Australian Academy of Science will hold a joint workshop on environmental protection and biodiversity hosted at the CAS Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research in Beijing. 

I look forward to attending the opening of this important event and learning about the outcomes of the discussions during this event.  

Last year we welcomed two Chinese delegations to the Academy in Australia.

We met with the National Natural Science Foundation of China (or NSFC) to discuss young scientist exchanges between Australia and China.

We also met with members of the China Association for Science and Technology (or CAST) to discuss education and outreach and the joint promotion of the International Science Council Regional Focal Point for Asia and the Pacific, incubated at our Academy.

Only a few days ago the Academy’s Chief Executive, Ms Anna-Maria Arabia and I met with Minister YIN Hejun at the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology.

This important meeting continues to facilitate and strengthen bilateral scientific collaborations.

The ongoing inclusive science collaboration between our two countries is also reflected in the election of new Fellows to the Australian Academy of Science for outstanding contributions to science.

Since 2017, about 7% of the Academy’s newly elected Fellows were born in China. That’s the second highest group of new Fellows from any country after the United Kingdom.

Professors Guoxiu Wang, Deli Chen and Xiaojing Hao are among 26 new Academy Fellows announced last week.

They will be admitted to the Academy later this year at the Shine Dome in Canberra. 

Finally, our engagement with China goes beyond the bilateral.

We are also pleased to collaborate in several multilateral fora, in part through our shared membership of the International Science Council and InterAcademy Partnership and as a member Academy of the Science 20 G20 engagement group.

International science collaboration is changing

The COVID-19 pandemic began just over five years ago.

Although now common to cite, I can think of no better example to demonstrate the power of multilateral science collaboration.

Australian scientists were among the leaders of COVID-19 research efforts. They collaborated most closely with China and the United Kingdom on COVID-19 publications.

Much has changed in the years since. The post-COVID world is not the same.

Some of the discourse regarding COVID-19 and the benefits of vaccination reflect a worrying and growing pattern of deliberate undermining of public trust in science.

In addition, today we seek to balance the benefits and risks associated with emerging technologies that were recently the stuff of dystopian Hollywood imagination – artificial intelligence, advanced robotics and quantum technologies.

And whilst they too demand collaborative science to deliver answers to government and society, they have fast become matters characterised more by strategic national competition, than collaboration.

It’s a conundrum of global proportions and my own field of scientific endeavour illustrates why.

My work in nanotechnology and semiconductors – an area of strategic competition between nations – is underpinned by and benefits from a multicultural research group.

My work is also made possible because of some 30 collaborations I maintain across the world, spanning countries including China, working across borders to build basic science knowledge.

The stark reality is that science is increasingly seen through a geopolitical lens.

Tariffs and trade restrictions are now both tools of, and impediments to, scientific strategy.

Multilateral collaboration is giving way to bilateral or bloc-based science partnerships.

We are in a global competition for the same minds, tools, and technologies.

Every country is trying to train, attract, or retain scientific talent in a constrained market. This is especially acute in critical areas – AI, climate tech, advanced manufacturing, and biosciences.

But advancing national interests and international science cooperation to address global challenges are not mutually exclusive.

In a world that is becoming increasingly competitive, with many countries’ leaders looking inwards, science must rise above and enable responsible collaboration. 

By combining resources, expertise and efforts across borders, the global scientific community can develop more effective, inclusive and sustainable solutions to the pressing issues facing humanity.

No single country can do it alone.

Cooperation not only advances science but also fosters global solidarity and peace.

Adaptation to climate change, decarbonising our economies, pandemics, and food and water security are complex challenges that require coordinated, multinational and transdisciplinary solutions with the involvement of all peoples.

Competition in an increasingly connected world

Despite the rise in global scientific competition, we live in an increasingly interconnected world.

The research of Associate Professor Arunima Malik from the University of Sydney is a case in point. 

Her research, published recently in the Nature Sustainability journal, examines how consumption in one country affects the environment and society of its trading partners.

These interconnections present opportunities to improve standards of living, skill development and employment generation, but also generate adverse impacts in the form of resource depletion, pollution, habitat loss and inequality.

International trade can amplify these effects by placing pressure on vulnerable nations, leading to spillover effects that hinder countries’ ability to progress toward the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Arunima’s research highlights the growing disparity between nations that benefit from trade and those that bear significant environmental and social costs, deepening existing inequalities.

Her research also underscores the critical importance of considering consumption-based cross-border impacts within the framework of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Arunima’s research was nominated by the Australian Academy of Science for the prestigious Frontiers Planet Prize, which recognises research with the most promising potential to keep humanity within planetary boundaries.

I am pleased to share with that Arunima was named Australia's National Champion for the prize and is now in the running for the global prize which will be announced on 17 June.

International research partnerships like mine and Arunima’s enhance the quality of our research, foster innovation, help us tackle global challenges and address complex issues – from climate change, health crises and food security to economic and geopolitical stabilisation.

They highlight what can be achieved when we work together.

We understand that this does not come without risks. But the risks of failing to collaborate are far greater.

Particularly when it comes to addressing climate change.

Both China and Australia are making significant investments to deploy low-carbon technologies and in clean energy to reduce emissions.

We must all work together to accelerate the deployment of clean energy sources.

And Learned Academies across the globe have a responsibility to continue to advocate that their own governments accelerate emission reduction.

Upholding scientific principles

The Academy has recently expressed its serious concerns regarding the dismantling of scientific principles that enable science to thrive and to benefit all peoples.

The consequences of such actions are profound and must be resisted.

The principles of freedom and responsibility in science, clearly articulated in Article 8 of the International Science Council’s Statues alongside the right to share in and benefit from scientific progress enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, must remain paramount.

When ideological and political agendas impede scientific enquiry, restrict the free exchange of knowledge or supress the fundamental right to participate freely in scientific activities, the whole of humanity suffers.

When science is censored based on an ideological position on climate change or vaccination, the very principles that enable science to thrive are eroded, and people suffer.

Long-term, widespread vaccination meant measles was officially declared eradicated in the United States in the year 2000. In 2025 people are once again dying from it following a recent measles outbreak in Texas.

We must unequivocally resist attempts to elevate conspiracy theories and efforts that undermine rigorous scientific evidence.

As private investment in R&D grows – consider that in the United States the business sector now funds 36% of basic research – we must be clear about how we ensure that everyone benefits from advances in science and technology.

Science conducted for the public good must not only continue to flourish but intensify. Only science provides the source of verified knowledge that transcends national borders and serves humanity collectively. 

For example, science undertaken for the public good enables the exchange of data collected across our atmosphere, oceans and in space – places that know no geographic borders. 

Global exchange of knowledge gives us a complete picture of our environment that feeds into weather forecasting, disaster responses, the aviation industry and maritime practices.

In the current climate we must redouble our efforts to ensure public good science is not obstructed, impeded or withheld by political, philosophical or religious beliefs and practices, or by those who withhold or monopolise knowledge for private gain.

Conclusion – science is critical to our future

Colleagues, in conclusion, science is critical to our future, and science academies are uniquely placed to think in the long term and maintain bridges for engagement.

Since our two academies were first established, we have fostered enduring partnerships at all levels.

This has helped our two governments open doors, navigate tricky negotiations, and unite people and institutions to the great benefit of all.

Science offers unique avenues for fostering mutual understanding and contributes to global peace and prosperity.

Scientific dialogue and evidence are our common language.

The role of scientists in our respective countries and our ongoing ability to nurture and engage in meaningful and responsible scientific collaborations is critical.

Thank you for your generous hospitality and for the opportunity to address you on this important topic.

A new five-year agreement between the Australian Academy of Science and CSIRO continues a long-standing collaboration to support CSIRO’s 15 Journals of Scientific Research.

These journals are published by CSIRO Publishing, an editorially independent publishing unit within CSIRO. Each year, over 1,000 high-quality, internationally significant articles are published, with a particular focus on Australia and the surrounding region.

The latest agreement, which runs to the end of 2029, confirms the joint commitment of CSIRO and the Academy to champion Australia’s contribution to international scientific research.

Delivering innovative solutions

“Both organisations recognise the importance of international research in expanding knowledge and delivering innovative solutions to society, industry and the environment,” Academy Chief Executive Anna-Maria Arabia said.

“Working together, we can ensure best practice in peer review continues to underpin science.”

The agreement also recognises the importance of open science, and of diversity and inclusion.

Editorial policy for the journals is developed by a Board of Standards, which is jointly chaired by CSIRO and the Academy.

“Our partnership enables us to maintain the high standard of the journals and to contribute to important discussions on the future direction of scientific and academic publishing. This is particularly important as the use of AI in scientific research and publishing evolves.

“The Academy will continue to explore how we can work with CSIRO to demonstrate the value of science and capture and share knowledge for future generations.

“I encourage Academy Fellows and other scientists to submit articles for publication in CSIRO’s journals, supporting Australian science content and publishing,” Ms Arabia said.

Shared principles

CSIRO Chief Executive Dr Doug Hilton said the partnership between the Australian Academy of Science and CSIRO has been built on shared principles.

“From maintaining a trusted archive of scientific endeavour, to the governance of how we publish research outcomes, we are committed to opening up discovery and access to impactful science.

“Ultimately this partnership will facilitate the use of rigorous, evidence-based science to help solve some of the major challenges facing our world today,” he said.

The CSIRO-owned journals covered by the agreement are:

• Animal Production Science      
• Australian Journal of Botany
• Australian Journal of Chemistry
• Australian Journal of Zoology
• Australian Systematic Botany
• Crop and Pasture Science
• Environmental Chemistry
• Functional Plant Biology
• Invertebrate Systematics
• Marine and Freshwater Research
• Pacific Conservation Biology
• Reproduction, Fertility and Development
• Sexual Health
• Soil Research
• Wildlife Research

In addition to the CSIRO-owned journals above, CSIRO Publishing publishes 15 journals on behalf of science-related organisations, such as the Academy’s journal Historical Records of Australian Science.