Since 1945, three-quarters of all global economic growth has been driven by technological advances. Since 1990, 90% of that advance has been rooted in fundamental science, according to Michael M. Crow, president of Arizona State University.

Corporate leaders in the United States understood this decades ago when they urged Congress to back ‘patient capital’ for research – because this type of investment creates openings for breakthrough applications.

Think of the building blocks of our modern economy – wifi, smartphones, advanced cancer therapies, drought-tolerant crops and satellite navigation. These began as basic research, often with no obvious immediate application. Then they became the platforms for whole new industries.

But in Australia, we still treat research funding as a discretionary extra, subject to the ebb and flow of political expediency and annual budgets. Despite decades of speeches, reviews and strategic papers, our investment in knowledge creation and its application has nose-dived.

Today, the Australian Academy of Science released a landmark report that systematically measures our science capability against future needs for the first time.

The findings are blunt. We have gaps – in workforce, infrastructure and coordination – that will cripple our ability to secure a bright future for the next generation, unless we act now.

What did the report find?

The new report maps Australia’s scientific capability and shortfalls across three major areas.

Over the next decade, Australia is facing a demographic change with an ageing population, a decreasing fertility rate, and increasing growth in urban and regional cities.

The second national challenge is technological transformation. In most areas of life, we’re experiencing rapid technological changes. This includes advances in artificial intelligence (AI) that are already changing the shape of the workforce.

The third challenge is climate change, decarbonisation and environment. It’s imperative for Australia to transition to net-zero economy and become resilient against the impacts of climate change.

What do we need to have in place for Australia to meet these challenges by 2035? Two key factors are science literacy and education, and national resilience. In a world of fractured geopolitics and technological competition, the countries that will thrive are those that can generate and apply knowledge for their own needs, in their own context.

The report has found eight key science areas that will be most in demand by 2035: agricultural science, AI, biotechnology, climate science, data science, epidemiology, geoscience and materials science.

For each of these, the report contains a full dashboard that shows gaps in capabilities – from education to workforce needs, research and development spending, publications and more.

Still not innovative enough

Since 2008, Australia’s spending on research and development as a proportion of gross domestic product has fallen so far behind the OECD average, it would take an extra A$28 billion a year just to reach parity.

In his election speech in 1990, then Prime Minister Bob Hawke issued a warning: being the lucky country was not enough, we had to become a clever country, too.

Today, 35 years on, Hawke’s vision of the clever country remains just that – a vision. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull tried to rekindle the impetus in 2015 with ‘the innovation nation’. However, this year Treasurer Jim Chalmers conceded our economy is still “not dynamic or innovative enough”.

The vast majority of global climate and earth system models have been developed in the northern hemisphere, and we need more work to understand Australian conditions as well as the Southern Ocean.

Our AI capacity is hostage to developments offshore. We import more than we invent in biotechnology, advanced manufacturing and clean energy.

These are not merely academic concerns – they are constraints on our sovereignty, resilience and competitiveness.

We need a ‘reservoir of talent’

But scientific capability is not something you can simply conjure up on a whim. You need a ‘reservoir of talent’, infrastructure and knowledge that takes decades to build.

Developing a climate scientist, a quantum physicist, or a vaccine researcher takes long-term investment in education, facilities and research programs. Abandoning or under-funding these pipelines for even a few years creates gaps. Knowledge can’t just flow when the tap is turned on if the reservoir is dry.

Today’s report shows the current pipeline and study choices of students don’t match the needs of Australia’s future workforce.

For example, in 2023 only 25.2% of students with a Year 12 qualification studied mathematics to at least intermediate level. Yet it’s a fundamental science discipline for AI.

Similarly, our economy relies heavily on resources and critical minerals, yet Australia isn’t training enough geoscientists.

It’s time for a whole-of-government science strategy, embedded in economic, education, defence and industry policy. The government should use the evidence in this report to address capability gaps and direct resources strategically to better position Australia for the next ten years and beyond.

Thirty-five years after Hawke’s challenge, it’s never been clearer: if we don’t act now, our luck will run out.

This piece by Professor Chennupati Jagadish, President of the Australian Academy of Science, was first published in The Conversation.

In June this year the Federal Treasurer said the government has “an obligation to future generations to deliver a better standard of living than we enjoy today.”

But does Australia have the science capability we need to meet the challenges facing the nation? The latest Intergenerational Report lists them: technological transformation; demographic change; and climate change, decarbonisation and environment.

An investigation by the Australian Academy of Science into Australia’s scientific capability needs by 2035 has found we have gaps – in workforce, infrastructure and coordination – that will cripple our ability to meet the challenges of 2060.

The Academy’s report ‘Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035’ examines the capability of Australia’s science system, its ability to compete and collaborate globally, and its contribution to the nation’s economy, security, health and quality of life.

Professor Ian Chubb AC, Chair of the report’s advisory panel, said the report is both a comprehensive, evidence-based effort to assess national science workforce capability against future needs, and an alarm.

“Since 1945, three-quarters of all global economic growth has been driven by technological advance, and since 1990, ninety per cent of that advance has been rooted in fundamental science,” Professor Chubb said.

“And yet, after decades of declining investment, Australia is facing a collapsing pipeline of STEM skills in the community and workforce essential for the nation’s future. 

“Simply put, our sovereign capacity to innovate and respond to emerging challenges all clearly outlined in the Intergenerational Report of 2023 is undermined.”

The Academy’s report identifies eight key science areas where there are projected to be gaps in capability and that will be most in demand by 2035: agricultural science, AI, biotechnology, climate science, data science, epidemiology, geoscience, and materials science.

“For the first time, we have a map of what needs to be done, backed by evidence, and no excuse to do nothing because now we know,” Professor Chubb said.

The Academy’s analysis found:

• We aren't training enough geoscientists, yet our economy rests heavily on resources, and ‘Critical Minerals’ is a priority of the National Reconstruction Fund.
• Jobs in artificial intelligence (AI) are expected to surge, yet only one in four Year 12 students is studying mathematics – the fundamental science discipline.  
• We’re facing national shortages of materials scientists, and the workforce in process and resources engineering is also projected to decline.
• The current pipeline and study choices of students is not aligned with the needs of our future workforce, with declining STEM participation and teacher shortages threatening relevant capability.

The Academy thanks advisory panel members and other stakeholders for their contributions to the report and looks forward to working with decision-makers.  The novel method developed to undertake the analysis can be applied to other sectors and the Academy welcomes interest in this area.

The Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035 report is being launched today at a national symposium in Canberra hosted by the Academy.  

The Australian Academy of Science says ABS data released today reveals Australian business expenditure on R&D is flatlining as a percentage of GDP, as leaders consider how to improve the nation’s productivity.

The ABS data showed business spent $24,410 million on R&D in 2023–24, up 18% from 2021–22.

President of the Australian Academy of Science Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC said business R&D expenditure has remained at 0.9% of GDP, well below the OECD average of 1.99%.

“Business R&D expenditure as a proportion of GDP has not changed since 2017–18 and in dollar terms this is now a A$28,783 million gap between Australia and the OECD average,” Professor Jagadish said.

The government’s Strategic Review of R&D is looking for ways to grow business investment in R&D. The Academy has proposed incentivising companies with revenue over $100 million to invest in R&D by applying a 0.25% or 0.5% levy on those that don’t, with funds from the scheme used to grow long-term research funding that keeps the innovation cycle going.

The Academy’s proposal provides a source of long-term research funding – an area no government minister wants to address.

R&D levies are well tolerated and highly effective in other parts of the economy such as in the agricultural and grains industries.

The ABS data released today shows gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) in 2023–24 is estimated at $45,082 million (1.69% of GDP), compared to $38,571 million in 2021–22 (1.66% of GDP).

Professor Jagadish said while this is an increase, it does not reverse the overall downward trend in investment in R&D.

“It remains well below the OECD average of 2.7% of GDP. In dollar terms, this is a gap of A$27,089 million. Urgent measures are needed to reverse this trend if Australia is to participate in a technologically advanced world,” Professor Jagadish said.

The President of the Australian Academy of Science, Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC, says the Australian Government’s national AI plan released today highlights how AI can benefit Australians, including through innovations made possible from Australian science.

The Academy welcomes the launch of an ‘AI Accelerator’ funding round of the Cooperative Research Centres program, which will provide many researchers a platform to translate their ideas into real-world products.

Professor Jagadish says advanced computing power (compute) infrastructure and data centres are critical to power AI research and its translation, however the plan has fallen short in that there are only concrete actions relating to data centres.

“Australia does have a leading opportunity to be a hub for data centres – but AI capability is so much more than data centres. If Australia became a regional hub for advanced computing this would generate huge economic and societal benefits, including providing opportunities for scientists and industries to innovate and compete globally.

“The Academy acknowledges that the government is undertaking work to map and assess the compute infrastructure landscape. We urge the government to turn that work into a 10-year strategy and investment plan for advanced computing and data after the Strategic Examination of Research and Development Independent Panel delivers their final report, expected later this month.

“The plan highlights how AI can benefit Australians, from detecting lung cancer to improving education outcomes. All of this progress comes from science.

“We must continue to support the fundamental research that underpins our next breakthroughs, to make sure Australians can enjoy the full benefits of AI advances by both creating new tools and adapting existing tools for Australian contexts.

“The Academy supports the notion that ‘Australia can be a leader in AI innovation and a trusted exporter of AI computing power, not just a consumer of AI technologies built elsewhere.’”

Next week the Academy will publish a series of discussion papers on how AI is changing science and research.

The Australian Government’s commitment to investing in R&D is being called into question after new figures reveal a continued decline in investment in R&D and a potential $400 million underspend on the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF).

The figures were contained in the 2025–26 Science, Research and Innovation (SRI) Budget Tables published by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources on 15 August 2025.

The latest figures show Federal Government investment in R&D for 2025–26 as a proportion of GDP remains consistently low at 0.53% of GDP, compared to 0.54% in 2024–25.

Last week during National Science Week, Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science Tim Ayres acknowledged Australia’s low research and development expenditure.

President of the Australian Academy of Science Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC said the latest figures show R&D investment isn’t even keeping up with inflation, let alone fuelling productivity.

“Acknowledging the decline is one thing, but it’s now time to turn this around because it is hurting Australia,” Professor Jagadish said.

“Australians want technologies like AI to boost productivity, new medicines to keep us healthy, and the most advanced Defence capabilities to keep our island nation safe. But we aren’t willing to invest sufficiently in the discoveries that create them.”

Government investment in R&D in dollar terms is $1.8 billion less than the OECD average. Australian business under-investment is $32.5 billion less than the OECD average.

The Academy has proposed incentivising companies with revenue over $100 million to invest in R&D by imposing a 0.25% or 0.5% levy on those that don’t, with funds from the scheme used to grow long-term research funding.

“The Academy’s proposal addresses intolerable business R&D underinvestment, rewards those that invest, and provides a source of long-term research funding – an area no government minister wants to address,” Professor Jagadish concluded.

This is the transcript of the keynote address by President of the Australian Academy of Science, Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC, at the Women of Colour in STEM Awards 2025. It was delivered on 6 October 2025 at the event in Melbourne, hosted by STEM Sisters.

Check against delivery.

Good evening.

I acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the land on which we meet, the Wurundjeri peoples.

I acknowledge and pay respects to the Traditional Owners and Elders, past and present, of all the lands on which the Academy operates, and its Fellows live and work.

Good evening distinguished guests from across the STEM sector, including friends and collaborators of the Academy.

It is a privilege to be part of a night dedicated to celebrating diversity, excellence and the future of STEM.

When we talk about diversity in science, we often discuss gender gaps, racial disparities, geographic or socioeconomic barriers as separate issues. But the reality is far more complex.

Many in this room know better than most that a woman from a culturally and linguistically diverse background doesn’t experience cultural barriers and gender discrimination as separate phenomena.

They are experienced as interconnected forces that compound to create significant barriers to participation and progression in STEM.

Science is fundamentally about understanding our world through diverse perspectives and rigorous inquiry.

And we need all of the available talent to advance our sector.

But when we systematically exclude voices and experiences, we create blind spots that weaken our research and limit our ability to solve complex global challenges.

The data from the government’s STEM Equity Monitor is clear: Australia’s current STEM workforce does not reflect Australian society.

The data show women, people who identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, LGBTQI, and those who have a disability, are under-represented in STEM.

Whilst the number of women in STEM occupations has increased over the last decade, women still only represent 15 per cent of the total STEM-qualified workforce in 2024.

Women represent just 22 per cent of people from non-English speaking backgrounds in STEM-qualified occupations.

Women who are born in a country other than Australia have even less representation.

It is important to understand the data, but intersectionality is not just about documenting disparities. It is about understanding their root causes and systemic nature.

And addressing them.

When a young person sees no one in a STEM leadership position who looks like them, shares their background, or understands their lived experience, the message is clear: this is not your space.

When research questions consistently ignore the needs and perspectives of members of our communities, we perpetuate cycles of exclusion that diminish the quality and relevance of our work.

But just imagine what we could achieve as a nation with more diversity and inclusion in our STEM workforce and beyond?

Building a more diverse and inclusive workforce, regardless of size and industry, must be part of the national discussion as we reflect on how to boost Australia’s productivity and innovation.

I repeat, we need all of the available talent to advance our sector.

That’s because we are in a global race for talent, with nations around the world in competition to attract the best minds.

Recently, the Academy released a landmark report – Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035 – that examines our science capability and workforce requirements over the next ten years.

The report highlighted gaps across the STEM workforce, that if not filled, will dramatically hinder our capacity to meet the challenges of our future.

The report found the current pipeline and study choices of students are not aligned with the needs of our future workforce. It also highlighted declining STEM participation and teacher shortages.

Again, we cannot afford to exclude any segment of our population from our STEM workforce.

Organisations that commit to inclusive hiring practices, mentorship programs, and partnerships with diverse institutions are not just doing good, it’s also the clever thing to do.

They’re accessing talent pools that have been historically overlooked and gaining competitive advantages through diverse perspectives.

It has been three years since the Australian Government asked an independent panel to find ways to increase diversity in STEM, known as the Pathway to Diversity in STEM review.

The findings from the review tell a particularly stark story when we look at intersectionality in practice.

According to the review, First Nations women and girls show significantly lower confidence and interest in STEM, with just 10 per cent expressing interest compared to 21 per cent of non-First Nations girls.

Those from lower socioeconomic and rural and remote areas also demonstrate reduced interest and confidence.

These aren’t just statistics.

The numbers represent brilliant minds whose personal callings and contributions to human knowledge may never be realised.

The review clearly articulates what many of us have long understood. Up until now, efforts to promote diversity in STEM have largely concentrated on improving the underrepresentation of women. This does not go nearly far enough.

The review calls for the government to focus on a more expansive and systematic approach to cultivating talent and promoting excellence across all dimensions of diversity.

Leadership, governance, cultural transformation and inclusive workplace environments have been identified as important priorities for improving diversity in the STEM sector.

The Academy welcomed the panel’s recommendation to develop a whole-of-government, long-term strategy to increase diversity and inclusion in STEM.

But the recommendations from the review were published in February 2024 and we are yet to see a response from the government, other than to say they are approaching the review’s findings with a focus on long-term impact.

Well, I say it’s time to get cracking. The Academy is calling on the government to accept and implement the review’s findings. Only then will it demonstrate it is serious about building a diverse STEM workforce that is so critical to building Australia’s future.

I would like to reflect on how far we’ve come in understanding intersectionality in Australia, which gives me hope for the future.

The Australian Academy of Science is proud to have been a co-founder of Science in Australia Gender Equity, otherwise known as SAGE, in partnership with the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering.

When SAGE was launched ten years ago, most people had no idea what intersectionality even meant.

Now, it stands as one of the core principles in SAGE’s Athena Swan framework, with comprehensive resources helping institutions understand and address these complex challenges.

This evolution in our national conversation gives me great hope for what we can achieve.

Across our institutions, innovative programs are demonstrating what’s possible when we embrace intersectional approaches to inclusion in STEM.

SAGE’s comprehensive Intersectionality Resource Guide provides a practical framework for institutions to understand and address these complex challenges.

The Academy’s own diversity and inclusion initiatives demonstrate our commitment to leading by example.

Our consultation for the Women in STEM Decadal Plan, published in 2019, revealed important insights about addressing intersectionality.

Stakeholders emphasised the need to “expand the collection of demographic data undertaken by funding agencies to enable an understanding of intersectionality and how it impacts women in STEM research”.

This evidence-based approach is crucial for developing effective interventions.

The path forward demands sustained investment in evidence-informed programs and policies that support intersectional inclusion.

This is more than quick fixes or temporary initiatives.

We must continue to make fundamental changes to how we structure our institutions and conduct our work.

I understand first hand how these challenges compound.

Growing up in India, I was taught ‘don’t speak about yourself’.

I was taught that it is for the rest of the world to judge how good or bad you are.

That is challenging when to succeed you must promote your own research.

These cultural challenges are compounded by the structural aspects of STEM that can create unwelcoming environments.

This includes confronting biases in peer review processes, addressing harassment and discrimination when it occurs, and creating professional development opportunities that help all members of our community develop inclusive leadership skills.

The pathway of my own STEM career has not always been easy, but the support of allies and mentors who recognised potential beyond surface characteristics made a huge difference to me and my career.

Their belief in my capabilities opened doors that might otherwise have remained closed.

This personal experience reinforces my conviction that we must create pathways for all talented individuals, regardless of their background.

The Academy that I lead celebrates and embraces diversity and inclusion in all its forms and as an organisation we aim to embed diversity and inclusion in everything we do.

The Academy has a crucial role to play as we embed intersectionality into everything we do, and as we build more inclusive systems.

We must lead by example in our own practices and policies.

We must use our platform to amplify voices that have been historically marginalised.

We must direct resources toward initiatives that support intersectional inclusion.

And we must hold ourselves accountable for progress, measuring our success not just in terms of scientific discoveries, but in terms of who gets to participate in making those discoveries.

We must work together to ensure that every Australian is able to access the transformational opportunities STEM offers and be able to thrive and contribute to Australia’s STEM sector.

When we embrace intersectionality in STEM, we not only make our fields more equitable – we make them excellent.

We expand the boundaries of what’s possible.

We ensure that science serves all of Australia, not just a privileged few.

The future of Australian science depends on our ability to create truly inclusive and intersectional communities of discovery.

Let us commit ourselves to this work with the same rigor, creativity, and persistence that we bring to our research.

Let us build a scientific enterprise that reflects our highest values and our greatest aspirations.

Together, we can create a future where every brilliant mind has the opportunity to contribute to human knowledge.

Finally, I would like to congratulate and acknowledge all the finalists here tonight and commend Dr Ruwangi Fernando and the awards team for this fantastic initiative.

Thank you.

Statement from the Presidents of the Royal Society Te Apārangi, the Royal Society of Canada, and the Australian Academy of Science

Distinguished Professor Dame Jane Harding DNZM FRSNZ FRACP

President, Royal Society Te Apārangi

Distinguished Research Professor Emerita Françoise Baylis C.M. O.N.S. PhD FRSC FISC

President, Royal Society of Canada

Emeritus Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC PresAA FRS FREng FTSE

President, Australian Academy of Science

Presented by Dame Jane on Wednesday 26 November 2025, in response to the communiqué from Indigenous Fellows at the Summit.

The Tri-Academy Partnership on Indigenous Engagement was launched to recognise and celebrate the achievements of Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders (including artists, innovators, thought leaders, and researchers) and to facilitate greater understanding and engagement that elevates their work for the benefit of all.

At our inaugural Tri-Academy Summit in 2024, hosted by the Royal Society of Canada, forthright discussion and debate centred on challenges and opportunities for Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders, and how to uphold the rights of Indigenous Peoples through research and scholarship. The Taikura Summit has continued and built on those exchanges, and we have now learned of the achievements and experiences of hundreds of Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders.

We have heard more about their journeys and achievements, and some of the myriad ways in which they are advancing understanding, particularly in the study of Indigenous histories, cultures, knowledges, and languages. These scholars and knowledge-holders have shown intellectual leadership by practising and advocating for research and education by, with, and for Indigenous communities. They have revitalised interest and awareness in Indigenous knowledge systems by connecting people through cultural activities, creative arts, and languages.

Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders have pioneered research practices, methodologies, and ethical frameworks, grounded in traditional worldviews and values, that uplift different ways of looking at challenges and have reshaped research practices across disciplines. Their work has shown that Indigenous knowledge systems are not simply historical artefacts, but living bodies of understanding that continue to evolve and to generate new insights.

Throughout this Summit, presenters and participants have demonstrated why the urgent challenges facing humanity today – climate change, biodiversity loss, social polarisation, economic instability, and erosion of human rights – require collective, transformative, and transdisciplinary approaches that must include Indigenous knowledges and perspectives.

At the same time, we have heard about the enduring effects of practices that have marginalised, misrepresented, and appropriated Indigenous knowledges. We acknowledge that in all three of our countries there have been failures to uphold the rights of Indigenous Peoples to participate in and benefit from science, knowledge, and research. We have heard of the difficulties of fitting Indigenous scholarship into structures and timeframes that do not allow for principles such as relationship-building to enable engagement with communities. We understand that the impact of disadvantages and inequities can persist for many generations – and will require sustained efforts to eradicate, within academia and beyond.

For all these reasons, and in the spirit of our Tri-Academy Partnership, we will continue to prioritise building meaningful relationships with Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders that are grounded in understanding, respect, and reciprocity. Working together with Indigenous Peoples, harmful impacts can be addressed – for example, by addressing barriers for Indigenous students, scholars, and knowledge-holders; providing professional support and mentorship; advocating for Indigenous data sovereignty; fostering diversity and inclusion; and promoting and celebrating inclusive excellence in Indigenous research and innovation – all of which support flourishing Indigenous scholarship.

Our academies reaffirm the commitment to help protect the rights and responsibilities of Indigenous Peoples to determine their own research agendas; to explore, preserve, and grow traditional knowledge systems; to participate actively in research; and to benefit from its applications and outcomes. We recognise that as learned academies and societies, we can play an important advocacy role within the broader academy. We have heard about the value of facilitating international multidisciplinary gatherings – such as this Summit – so that scholars can meet, collaborate, and exchange knowledge. We will share what we have learned at this Summit with other organisations – including other learned academies and societies – and identify specific initiatives to build together towards our next Summit, which will be hosted by the Australian Academy of Science and its partners in 2026.

Indigenous scholars and knowledge-holders make vital contributions to research, innovation, the academies, and society. Through greater engagement and cooperation, we can grow and share knowledge for the benefit of all.

President of the Australian Academy of Science, Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC, has welcomed Minister for Science the Hon Senator Tim Ayres decision to start exploratory talks with the European Commission on Australia’s possible association to Horizon Europe.

Valued at over $A170 billion (€95 billion), Horizon Europe is the world’s largest funding program for research and innovation.

Professor Jagadish said Australia’s association with Horizon Europe would assist in mitigating current geopolitical risk in Australia’s scientific enterprise and deliver scientific and economic benefits to Australia.

“The global challenges we are facing require global solutions, requiring researchers and countries to work together. International scientific collaboration is a matter of strategic national interest and something Australia cannot do without,” Professor Jagadish said.

“Australia collaborates with individual European countries, but association to Horizon Europe presents an opportunity for strategic, scaled collaboration that will have a multiplier effect on research resources and scientific effort.”

Deepening Australia’s research and industry relationship with European countries was the focus of an event hosted by the Academy in July that was attended by Ms Signe Ratso, the European Commission’s chief negotiator for association to Horizon Europe.

The Academy presented data on Australia’s research collaborations in areas aligned to three of the Australian Government’s Future Made in Australia priorities: green metals, low-carbon liquid fuels, and clean energy manufacturing.

The analysis revealed a consistent pattern of strong collaborations with Europe across most of the fields, emphasising the EU as a critical research partner to advance Australia’s interests.

It also highlighted a strong track record of research collaboration with individual European nations in these priority areas, which could be leveraged via association to Horizon Europe.

“If this is the trend across individual countries, when aggregated, we would expect amplified capability and benefit for Australia via the Horizon Europe program,” Professor Jagadish said.

The event artwork was designed by Leah Albert for the Australian Academy of Science. Find out all about the event artwork.

Welcome to our daily highlights

Science at the Shine Dome is the Academy’s flagship event. Over four days from 1 to 4 September 2025, Australia’s science sector gathered at the Shine Dome in Canberra – the home of Australian science – to celebrate science and to honour outstanding achievements. 

It was a hybrid event, with audiences joining us in person in Canberra and online from anywhere in the world.

Fellows elected in 2025 signed the historic Charter Book and delegates had a unique opportunity to learn about the depth and breadth of Australian science from the nation’s top scientists.

We also celebrated the recipients of the Academy’s prestigious awards, and on Thursday 4 September, the National Symposium explored the Academy’s landmark report examining the capabilities Australia requires to meet our national ambitions: Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035.

We are grateful to our generous 2025 event partners, who made this event possible:

• Platinum Partners: Department of Defence, Department of Industry, Science and Resources
• Diversity and Inclusion Partner: University of Queensland
• Gala Dinner Partner: University of Sydney
• Spring Soiree Partner: GSK
• Symposium Supporter: Digital Science
• Gold Partners: Deakin University, Monash University, University of Adelaide, University of Melbourne
• Silver Partner: Evans & Partners
• Bronze Partner: QUT, Swinburne University of Technology
• EMCR Supporters: Curtin University, Forrest Research Foundation, Macquarie University, NCI, University of Melbourne, University of Newcastle, UNSW Sydney, University of Western Australia
• Gelato Cart Partner: The GrantEd Group
• Coffee Break Partner: Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute
• Juice Bar Partner: UniSuper

On this page

Day 4: Thursday 4 September

Day 3: Wednesday 3 September

Day 2: Tuesday 2 September

Day 1: Monday 1 September

Handy links

Handy links

• Watch the livestreams
• Read the event program
• Visit the event website
• Follow the action on X (formerly Twitter): #ShineDome25 and Academy.

Day 4: Thursday 4 September

The final day of Science at the Shine Dome 2025 was dedicated to the 2025 National Symposium, in which the Academy launched one of the most ambitious policy efforts in its history: a report systematically assessing Australia’s science capability against its future needs, titled Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035.

Read the report

Read the full report Read the abridged report

Chair of the advisory panel for the report Professor Ian Chubb AC shared how, about 18 months ago, he and others in the Academy were reflecting on how Australia had built capacity at different stages of its history.

“We asked whether we still invest in expertise that will give us the capacity should or when we need it. That same expertise is our entry to the global bank of knowledge where we are 3% depositors but where we get to learn from others and influence the big decisions with worldwide significance,” Professor Chubb said.

“When we decided on Australian Science, Australia’s Future, the Academy did not want to add yet another glossy report full of slogans and good intentions. Or, less generously, add yet another way to gather dust on shelves, prop open doors or take up space on laptops. We wanted to use the available data to prepare the most comprehensive analysis of Australia’s present science capability that we could.

“We aimed to answer an apparently simple question: does the science we have match the science we need, or might need?”

He said they were inspired by the Intergenerational Report produced by the Commonwealth Government in 2023, which sets out the five pressures Australia will face in the coming decades.

“So, we refined our question. We asked: what science capability would Australia need to meet those challenges, and build an economy that supports a better future for all Australians? We set out to complete the most comprehensive analysis of Australia’s science system undertaken to date – not just to count what we have, but to test whether it is fit for purpose,” he said.

“We asked: if Australia is to lift its investment in R&D, where should that investment be directed? What capability do we need to strengthen, and what capability do we need to build almost from scratch?”

Professor Chubb was joined by the Academy’s Head Science Policy and Advice Dr Hayley Teasdale, to discuss the findings of the report.

The report drew on data dashboards, expert workshops, and foresight techniques, to map scientific capability and shortfalls across three major challenge areas:

• technological transformation
• demographic change
• climate change, decarbonisation and environment.

Based on these challenges, the report identified the following eight science capabilities increasing most in demand over the coming decade:

• Agricultural science
• Artificial intelligence
• Biotechnology
• Climate science
• Data science
• Epidemiology
• Geoscience
• Materials science

Read our landmark #Science2035 report: https://t.co/7fvd9sPs1M pic.twitter.com/hu3USu70Yw

— Australian Academy of Science (@Science_Academy) September 4, 2025

This was followed by two panel discussions.

One, on the practical implications of the findings, featured:

• Professor Peter Shergold, Chair, Australian Research Council
• Professor Kate Darian-Smith, President, Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia
• Professor Barney Glover, Commissioner, Jobs and Skills Australia 
• Joseph Mitchell, Assistant Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions
• Professor Lynette Russell, Monash Indigenous Studies Centre, Monash University
• Professor Margaret Sheil, Vice Chancellor, QUT and Secretary Science Policy, Australian Academy of Science
• Dr Caroline Smith, Head, Centre for Education and Training, Australian Industry Group
• Martijn Wilder, Chair, National Reconstruction Fund 

After a short break, the second panel on the implications for the Strategic Examination of Research and Development featured:

• Robyn Denholm, Chair, Strategic Examination of Research and Development
• Tony Cook, Secretary, Department of Education
• Professor Susan Dodds, Deputy Chair, Australian Research Council and Policy Lead, Australian Academy of the Humanities 
• Professor Mark Ferguson, Chair, European Innovation Council, former Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government of Ireland 
• Rosemary Huxtable, Chair, National Health and Medical Research Strategy
• Meghan Quinn, Secretary, Department of Industry, Science and Resources
• Adjunct Professor Peter Rossdeutscher, Chair, Industry Innovation and Science Australia

Watch the recording of the full day’s proceedings

Day 3: Wednesday 3 September

The third day of Science at the Shine Dome 2025 began with the final group of 2025 new Fellows presentations, led by Professor Rajeev Varshney, who has made significant advances in developing and applying large-scale genomic resources to crop management.

“I'm an agricultural scientist, and we know that agriculture and food is facing lots of global challenges,” Professor Varshney said, adding that overpopulation, climate change and ongoing geopolitical conflicts were presenting serious threats to food security, particularly in developing countries.

“The good news is that here in Australia, we play a very key role to contributing towards food and nutrition security around the world ... So, what agricultural scientists in Australia are doing – when I say agriculture, [I mean] not only the geneticists, but the entire agriculture community, including agronomers, pathologists, etc. – we are working towards enhancing yield, quality, and production area.”

Professor Varshney explained how he and colleagues have spent the decades working to understand the genetics of different agronomic traits such as drought and disease resistance, and yield.

They recently completed genome sequencing of around 10,000 chickpea lines. Along with organising training courses to boost local genomics and breeding skills, he said several high-yield, climate-resilient, nutritious varieties of chickpea have been released in India and some African countries.

Professor Guoxiu Wang then spoke about their internationally acclaimed work improving the safety and efficiency of lithium batteries, followed by Professor Nicole Webster, whose research on marine microbes has reached from the west coast of Australia to the Great Barrier Reef and down to Antarctica – delivering transformational insights into coral reef microbiology and pioneering the application of molecular tools.

Before breaking for morning tea, Professor Tony Weiss shared his “elastic journey” into the spring-like molecule tropoelastin, which is crucial for most vertebrates.

What Bayesian statistics have to do with Mars, analysing the Antarctic seafloor, a new understanding of breast cancer, and more

The audience then heard from the winners of the premier honorific awards: Professor Yuri Kivshar, recipient of the 2025 Matthew Flinders Medal and Lecture, and Professor Jane Visvader, recipient of the 2025 Ruby Payne-Scott Medal and Lecture.

Professor Visvader, who began her career in plant virology before ending up researching breast cancer, said her award reflects the hard work of many talented postdoctoral students, collaborators and mentors who she has worked with during the last several decades.

She noted that breast cancer is a “very heterogeneous disease ... and this impacts on clinical behaviour and response.”

“From the start, our laboratory has tried to understand mechanisms that lead to breast cancer through the prism of normal breast development,” she said.

Professors Visvader and Kivshar received their medals at the Gala Dinner later on Wednesday night.

Next, the audience was taken on a tour from the diversity of life on Earth through to how Bayesian statistics are being used for planetary protection, by two recipients of the Academy’s career honorific awards: Professor Steven Chown (awarded the 2025 Suzanne Cory Medal) and Professor Noel Cressie (awarded the 2025 Hannan Medal).

During the lunch break, an invitation-only event was held for all Academy awardees, donors and sponsors.

After the break, we also heard from: 2025 Jaeger Medal winner Professor Hugh O’Neill, 2025 David Craig Medal winner Professor Alison Rodger, 2025 Thomas Ranken Lyle Medal winner Professor George Willis, 2025 Nancy Millis Medal winner Associate Professor Natasha Hurley-Walker, and 2025 Jacques Miller Medal winner Professor James Hudson.

Next up were the medal presentations for winners of the early-career honorific awards:

• Anton Hales Medal: Associate Professor Stijn Glorie
• Christopher Heyde Medal: Associate Professor Anita Liebenau
• Dorothy Hill Medal – Dr Linda Armbrecht
• Fenner Medal – Associate Professor Katherine Moseby
• Fenner Medal – Associate Professor Daniel Noble
• Gottschalk Medal – Associate Professor Amy Cain
• Gottschalk Medal – Associate Professor Shom Goel
• John Booker Medal – Associate Professor Qianbing Zhang
• Le Fèvre Medal – Dr Fengwang Li
• Moran Medal – Professor Margarita Moreno-Betancur
• Pawsey Medal – Associate Professor Claudia Lagos
• Pawsey Medal – Dr Daria Smirnova
• Ruth Stephens Gani Medal – Dr Ira Deveson

#StarsOfScience – Electrochemist Dr @FengwangLi—our 2025 Le Fèvre Medal recipient—is using renewable electricity to help move us all to a circular carbon economy where recycling carbon reduced our reliance on fossil fuels. pic.twitter.com/umEA3UoY2a

— Australian Academy of Science (@Science_Academy) September 2, 2025

The 2025 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Scientist Award was presented to Dr Mitchell Gibbs and Associate Professor Shannon Kilmartin-Lynch. Read more about their work.

The 2025 Max Day Environmental Science Fellowship Award was then presented to Rebecca Greening and Dr Nina Wootton, for their research investigating ecosystem productivity and microplastics.

On Wednesday evening, Minister for Science and Minister for Industry and Innovation Senator the Hon Tim Ayres delivered the keynote address at the Academy’s Gala Dinner, which was supported by the University of Sydney.

Our thanks to Senator the Hon Tim Ayres, Minister for Science and Minister for Industry and Innovation for addressing our Gala Dinner tonight. (@ScienceGovAu). #ShineDome25 pic.twitter.com/Ip4fldA22q

— Australian Academy of Science (@Science_Academy) September 3, 2025

Academy President Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC also spoke, remarking that the last few days had reminded him how lucky we are in Australia.

“Gee, we are a lucky country. Not only because of our mineral wealth and democratic stability – which we must never take for granted,” Professor Jagadish said.

“We are lucky that so many Fellows, around half of which were born overseas, call Australia home. Lucky that our research is of the highest quality. So good that it is developed into technologies – too often by other countries. Lucky that our researchers are such prolific international collaborators enabling Australia to access 97% of the knowledge generated elsewhere, and adapted to the needs of our people.”

He added that our research capability is something we should never take for granted – and that tomorrow, on the final day of Science at the Shine Dome, the Academy’s National Symposium would explore the capability gaps that must be addressed now, as part of the report ‘Australian Science, Australia’s Future: Science 2035’.

Day 2: Tuesday 2 September

“A group where everyone is trying to make the world better”: New Fellows admitted to Academy

On Tuesday morning, the 2025 Fellows were formally admitted to the Academy and invited to sign their names in the historic Charter Book, which was a gift to the Academy from the UK Royal Society when the Australian Academy of Science was founded in 1954 by Royal Charter.

Their signatures join those of esteemed peers from the 71 years of the Academy’s history – including Emeritus Professor Dorothy Hill, Sir David Attenborough and Sir Mark Oliphant, alongside the late Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip.

Join us LIVE tomorrow morning for Day 2 of Science at the Shine Dome 2025. Beginning at 8:30am AEST, witness the admission of our newest Fellows when they'll sign our historic Charter Book.
Did you know that HRH Prince Philip was present at the Shine Dome when Her Majesty the… pic.twitter.com/cIGLwF7SPz

— Australian Academy of Science (@Science_Academy) September 1, 2025

The 26 Fellows of the Academy elected in 2025 are:

• Professor David Adams FAA FAHMS, University of Wollongong
• Professor Gabrielle Belz FAA FAHMS, University of Queensland
• Dr Josep Canadell FAA FTSE, CSIRO
• Professor Deli Chen AO FAA, University of Melbourne
• Professor Helen Christensen AO FAA FAHMS FASSA, UNSW Sydney
• Professor Tamara Davis AM FAA, University of Queensland
• Professor Jeffery Errington FAA FRS, University of Sydney
• Professor Jürgen Götz FAA FAHMS, University of Queensland
• Professor Xiaojing Hao FAA FTSE, UNSW Sydney
• Emeritus Professor Mark Howden AC FAA FTSE, Australian National University
• Professor David Huang FAA FAHMS, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research
• Professor Trevor Ireland FAA, University of Queensland
• Dr Marlene Kanga AO FAA FTSE, iOmniscient Pty Ltd
• Professor Derek Leinweber FAA, University of Adelaide
• Professor Robert Mahony FAA, Australian National University
• Professor Richard Middleton FAA, University of Newcastle
• Professor Christina Mitchell AO FAA FAHMS, Monash University
• Associate Professor Andrew Nash FAA FTSE, CSL Limited
• Professor Jessica Purcell FAA, Monash University
• Professor Clare Scott AM FAA FAHMS, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research
• Professor Aidan Sims FAA, University of Wollongong
• Professor Michael Stumpf FAA, University of Melbourne
• Professor Rajeev Varshney FAA FRS, Murdoch University
• Distinguished Professor Guoxiu Wang FAA, University of Technology Sydney
• Professor Nicole Webster FAA, University of Tasmania
• Professor Anthony Weiss AM FAA FTSE FAHMS, University of Sydney.

Nobel laureate Professor Donna Strickland FAA FRS from the University of Waterloo and Professor Hiroaki Suga FAA from the University of Tokyo were also elected as Corresponding Members – eminent international scientists with strong ties to Australia who have made outstanding contributions to science.

Professors Strickland, Suga, Leinweber and Götz were unable to attend the ceremony in Canberra in person this year.

Find out more about each of the 2025 Fellows.

Watch the new Fellow videos.

Theoretical cosmologist Professor Tamara Davis said it was “a huge honour” to have been elected as a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science.

“You’re joining a group where everybody is trying to improve the world in some way through their science,” Professor Davis said.

She cited being taken outside to see Halley’s Comet as a child and wondering how humans could know it would reappear in 75 years as her earliest memory of being intrigued by astronomy.

“When I look at the vastness of space, it makes me realise just how precious our Earth is here ... [it] makes you think about all of these petty struggles that we’re having here on Earth. What do they mean compared to the importance of looking after our planet?”

Professor Davis began her presentation by taking the audience back to the discovery of the expansion of the Universe, before sharing her “adventures into the dark side”.

The presentations by the new Fellows spanned from the expansion of the Universe to the crucial role of microbes in supporting life on Earth: with Professor Jeffery Errington being introduced to the stage as someone too modest to tell the audience that he has a bacterium named after him.

However, on the flipside of maintaining a healthy planet, Professor Errington shared how much of his career has focused on the terrible infectious diseases that microbes can cause.

After a break for lunch, the new Fellows presentations continued, with immunologist Professor Gabrielle Belz taking a moment to thank the teams she has worked with during her career.

“Science, for all of us, doesn't occur in a void,” Professor Belz said.

“It depends on the contributions of extremely talented and committed students, postdoctoral fellows, and those international and national collaborators with which and whom we want to discuss our science.”

The audience also heard how, as a high school student in China, seeing harm caused to fish by fertiliser led Professor Deli Chen to study soil science and aquaculture.

Professor Chen went on to become an internationally recognised authority on the efficiency of nitrogen fertiliser use and its impact on global food security.

Professor Xiaojing Hao’s presentation, on developing cost-effective thin-film semiconductor materials to harvest sunlight for future photovoltaic products and applications, led to an engaging discussion with an audience member.

After a break for afternoon tea, Chief Defence Scientist at the Department of Defence and Academy Fellow Professor Tanya Monro AC FAA FTSE gave the Platinum Partner Address.

Professor Monro said the Fellows represented the pinnacle of our R&D system.

“I thank you for everything you do to make our nation stronger and cleverer through science,” Professor Monro said.

“It’s my mission and my passion to make sure that more of government’s decisions are informed by data and evidence, and I thank you for your contribution to that.”

In the next segment of new Fellows presentations, Professor Jessica Purcell took the audience back to the time of Euclid of Alexandria, the Greek mathematician often referred to as ‘the father of modern geometry’, and his five fundamental postulates.

However, Professor Purcell noted that hyperbolic geometry was not discovered for another roughly 2,000 years after Euclid, illustrating that “Just because something is overlooked does not mean that it is unimportant,” she said.

The day was capped by the Spring Soiree Networking Function, presented by GSK, including the presentation of the GSK 2025 Award for Research Excellence. The award was made to world-leading virologist and Academy Fellow Professor Eddie Holmes for his work on AI-based disease detection.

Day 1: Monday 1 September

The first day of Science at the Shine Dome 2025 kicked off with the mentee meet and greet for the Asia-Pacific Academic Mentoring Program.

This program, now in its second year, connects early-career researchers with senior science mentors, to guide young scientists from developing nations within the region to become future leaders in academia.

The Asia-Pacific Academic Mentoring Program is facilitated by the International Science Council (ISC) Regional Focal Point for Asia and the Pacific (RFP-AP) hosted by the Australian Academy of Science.

On Monday, 21 mentees attended, along with five ISC RFP-AP staff members.

Read more about the program.

Next up, there were multiple professional development opportunities for early- and mid-career researchers (EMCRs): 75 EMCRs participated in workshops on grant writing, science in international affairs and diplomacy, and Future Earth Australia’s national strategy.

At the same time, the ISC held its Advisory Council Meeting, which was by invitation only.

The EMCR Forum also held its Executive Meeting today.

Breaking down walls: from preventing heart failure, to native bee recovery and more

After a break for lunch, the Shine Dome was host to the 10th Falling Walls Lab Australia Finale, where the winners from each of the five state labs gave a three-minute presentation on their research or innovative idea. They were competing for the chance to represent Australia at the Falling Walls Science Summit in Berlin on 7 November 2025.

The Australian Academy of Science has been hosting the Falling Walls Lab Australia competition since 2016 in partnership with the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany in Canberra.

Ms Sigrid Sommer, Deputy Head of Mission at the German Embassy Canberra, congratulated all finalists for making it this far, given there is such a “competitive and highly skilled research landscape across Australia.”

"Your talent, dedication, and independent thinking are an inspiration, and could help us to solve the complex challenges we face today." – Ms Sigrid Sommer, Deputy Head of Mission, German Embassy Canberra pic.twitter.com/VVD8IJqrlH

— Australian Academy of Science (@Science_Academy) September 1, 2025

This year’s finale was hosted by Dr Emma-Anne Karlsen, the 2023 Falling Walls Lab Australia winner, and Academy Fellow Professor Hans Bachor AM FAA.

The event drew a large crowd, with 177 people filling the Shine Dome’s Ian Wark theatre and many more watching online.

The crowd heard from 11 finalists:

• Dr Auriane Drack, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute/University of Melbourne, ‘Breaking the wall of heart failure’
• Dr Houda Ennaceri, Murdoch University, ‘Breaking the wall of microalgal biofuels’ 
• Dr Harriet Goodrich, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, The University of Tasmania, ‘Breaking the wall of fishing and climate change’
• Yonglin Mai, The University of Tasmania, ‘Breaking the wall of hidden water pollution’
• Sreshtha Malik, University of Adelaide, ‘Breaking the wall of herbicide-resistant weeds’
• Mabel Day, University of Adelaide, ‘Breaking the wall of forever chemicals’
• Khoi Nguyen, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, ‘Breaking the wall of antimalarial discovery’
• Dr Kit Prendergast, Curtin University and University of Southern Queensland, ‘Breaking the wall of native bee recovery after bush fires’
• Farrel Separgo, University of Technology Sydney, ‘Breaking the wall of diagnostic thermometres’
• Chundu Tamang, University of Southern Queensland, ‘Breaking the wall of profit over planet: Recycling polymer waste from oil and gas industries’
• Dr Jacob Thorstensen, Bond University, ‘Breaking the Wall of Muscle Weakness’

After a break for refreshments while the jury deliberated, Dr Emma-Anne Karlsen shared how attending the Falling Walls Science Summit in Berlin in 2023 felt like a truly unique experience.

“As scientists, we so often exist in these silos, where we go to our oncology conference and speak to our oncology friends,” Dr Karlsen said.

“Whereas this was just an amazing adult science fair, where you got to interact with so many different people from so many different backgrounds, and get exceptionally fresh perspectives on your work, and how you can scale it up, but also apply it to different areas.”

All finalists were presented with a certificate of participation in the finale.

Australia’s Chief Scientist Professor Tony Haymet, who chaired the jury, then announced the winners.

Mabel Day of the University of Adelaide was awarded first place by the jury, as well as winning the People’s Choice Award.

Dr Auriane Drack of the Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute / University of Melbourne took second place, while Khoi Nguyen of Burnet Institute was awarded third place.

The three winners will now represent Australia at the Falling Walls Science Summit in Berlin on 7 November 2025.

Congratulations to all finalists!

Read about past winners.

This is a transcript of an interview on 24 September 2025 AEST between ABC TV News Breakfast program host Emma Rebellato and the Academy’s Chief Executive Anna-Maria Arabia at United Nations Headquarters

Emma Rebellato: Let’s head back to New York now, where Australian scientists are today helping lead a charge at the UN to make healthy indoor air a human right. We’re joined by the Chief Executive of the Australian Australian Academy of Science. Thanks for joining us.

Anna-Maria Arabia: Good morning, Australia. It’s lovely to be with you, Emma.

Emma Rebellato: Tell me what prompted this move.

Anna-Maria Arabia: There have been so many advocates, professional scientists from around the globe who have been working for years to advance clean indoor air. They have come together at the UN General Assembly in this global movement to declare indoor air quality, or clean indoor air, a basic human right.

We’re doing it because we spend 90% of our time indoors and yet we do not monitor or measure the quality of the air, but we do monitor the air that we breathe outdoors, the food we eat, and the water we drink. Where we spend most of our time, we have no idea about the the quality of the air that we breathe.

Emma Rebellato: Are there particular areas, countries, specific things, buildings that make indoor air quality bad?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Yes, poor indoor air quality affects every one of us in every country of the world. Think for a moment, the COVID-19 pandemic showed us that viral transmission, SARS-COV2 was airborne.

Think about vehicles that enter indoor spaces, transmission in childcare centres, hospitals, in workplaces across Australia, and think for a moment in developing countries where people are cooking with very poor sources of energy, often that’s women cooking, and are breathing in poor pollutants every single day. It’s an issue that affects every one of us and it’s time that we declare clean indoor air a basic human right.

Emma Rebellato: If this declared a basic human right, what will that do? What will change?

Anna-Maria Arabia: Well, we would be monitoring clean indoor air. The science of indoor air quality is very well understood. There’s basic things we can measure, CO₂, PM2, we can ensure our ventilation rates are excellent, so the air I’m breathing isn’t coming out of someone else’s lungs and vice versa.

We can apply technology that exists today. Some of that technology is really simple and straightforward, and other technology we know is really effective. For example, in aged care qualities, in some parts of Australia, we’re trialling UV light to kill viral transmission, really simple technology, that can be implemented today.

We would see better health, we would see lower absenteeism and better productivity across the nation. If we did just those things, the economic benefits in health and productivity in Australia alone would be $20 billion annually in perpetuity.

Emma Rebellato: So those are the benefits. What are the consequences and the health impacts, economic impacts, of poor indoor air quality?

Anna-Maria Arabia: So, when we’re not breathing clean indoor air, we’re seeing cognitive function decline, we’re seeing poor performance by workers, students, there’s good evidence to support this, strong evidence to support this.

When viruses spread, we see absenteeism and therefore productivity goes down. That’s common in workplaces across Australia. Then if you think of the longer-term impacts in terms of respiratory illness, asthma, and impacts on cardiovascular disease and every part of the body. Science has shown us poor indoor air quality reduces our health and has consequences, in some countries in survival, but in performance overall.

Emma Rebellato: Thank you very much for joining us, we’ll be watching what happens at the UN with this one.

Anna-Maria Arabia: It’s a pleasure to be with you.