Extracts of submissions to

Australia's Innovation System inquiry:
Parliament of Australia. Economics References Committee

Group of Eight (Submission 13)

A pervasive research culture is important because it enables universities to focus on learning rather than teaching, thinking as well as doing, debate not just assertion. One reason this is becoming ever more important is that sources of information are multiplying exponentially, as are the technological means of accessing information. There is usually no problem in finding information whenever and wherever someone needs it. However, the ease of acquiring information places even more onus on universities to help students develop the ability to evaluate information, assess its status and quality, and then convert it through independent thought to knowledge and wisdom. (Page 4)

Universities provide the continuing supply of graduates who take up positions in business. In moving from universities to business, graduates carry with them the knowledge, skills, expertise and awareness of modern technologies and thinking they developed through their university education. Graduates are aware of the most recent developments in their disciplines, and of the relevance of these advances, because university research activities inform their teaching. In addition, university education builds broader skills and competencies such as critical thinking, effective communication and culturalawareness that underlie much modern business. Graduate recruitment provides access to the latest researchand in itself can provide informal links to university staff. This is important because the empirical evidencesuggests that the major factor limiting business innovation is the lack of creative people and people having thenecessary skills and expertise, not access to information and research. (Page 8)

The research performed by universities is readily available because academics publish in journals that researchers in business access and read.Academics also present at conferences that business people attend and make information available throughweb sites, newsletters and many other means. (Page 9)

There are many different avenues having the potential to improve university business linkages in particular. However, the many reviews and inquiries that have examined how to do this tend to identify a small number ofgeneral themes. It is possible to summarise these as follows:

  • Remove impediments to information flow between the sectors. Make information coming from university research easy to access, cheap and understandable to those who might make use of it.Make it easier to find. Promote and facilitate the movement of people between the sectors.
  • Address the cultural barriers and differences between universities and business. Have recruitmentand promotion systems that value academics who work with or for business; and promote mutual understanding through work integrated learning, secondments and joint appointments.
  • Identify ways in which all sectors can more easily identify potential collaborators in the othersectors.
  • Identify ways to improve the absorptive capacity of business, including through the employment ofmore research capable employees, improved management training and the promotion ofcollaboration between the sectors.
  • Market more effectively those government programs which support business research and requirebusiness university collaboration or help business to identify sources of advice and problem solvingcapacity.(Page 13)

Universities Australia (Submission 134)

Research infrastructure

It has been recognised internationally that a collaborative model for the provision of critical national research infrastructure is the most cost-effective means for supporting research excellence and securing a powerful research and innovation system.

The National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) has provided Australia with world class research infrastructure facilities. Since 2004, the $2.5 billion invested by the federal government in the facilities has leveraged an additional $1 billion from state governments, universities, research facilities and industry. These facilities are accessed by more than 30,000 researchers and employ more than 500 technical experts, researchers and facility managers in 222 institutions.

The NCRIS addressed the problem that many high-priority, medium-scale research facilities or infrastructure investments were too large or complex to be supported by any single research institution, and too important to the wider research community to be confined to individual interests or jurisdictions. When many researchers can access shared, modern facilities it provides a cost-effective approach that delivers value to both investors and the beneficiaries of research outcomes.

World class research facilities developed through the NCRIS include the Integrated Marine Observing System, Atlas of Living Australia, the Australian Plant Phenomics Facility and the Australian National Fabrication Facility (ANFF). The investment in these facilities has delivered strong returns to the community. The principles that underpinned the investment and the processes followed in prioritising and allocating the funding have optimised the strategic impact of the dollars invested.

Addressing the need for a long-term, sustainable model to fund major research infrastructure continues to be one of the most pressing issues for government in supporting and building a powerful national research and innovation capability. The additional funding of $150 million for the NCRIS in the 2014–15 Budget is welcome, but an ongoing commitment must be made, informed by the planned review of existing research infrastructure provision and requirements. (pages 4-5)

Chief Scientist (Submission 20)

Key points

  • Nations at all levels of development are prioritising the capabilities required for innovation. At the core of almost every national innovation agenda is a reliance on STEM: science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
  • Innovation is central to building jobs, increasing productivity and generating wealth, but Australia’s innovative capacity remains limited by structural and cultural barriers.
  • Innovation performance and national competitiveness can be enhanced through a forward-looking, long-term and whole-of-government strategy. Page 1.

Regional Universities Network (Submission 22)

Introduction

For Australia to remain a prosperous nation with high standards of health and well-being, it will be important for the Government’s policy settings to encourage innovation across diverse industry sectors and geographic locations. Central to this outcome will be:

  • a highly educated and adaptable workforce;
  • institutions and firms that can generate and exploit knowledge;
  • strong networks that connect individuals groups and organisations; and
  • the economic and business conditions, and the policy settings that encourage investment and innovation.

Regional universities have a fundamental role to play in innovation, productivity and national development. They drive regional economic, social, cultural and environmental development, and help to unlock human potential of their regions, and thus the nation. (page 1)

Australian Academy of the Humanities (Submission 88)

Investment in humanities infrastructures is critical to support research, but it also has direct application for the broader public. Australian communities have developed a thirst for literary, legal, historical, genealogical and social databases readily accessible from kitchens to classrooms. Meeting community demand in this area requires innovative and cost-effective solutions through research and development of appropriate information infrastructure. (page 4)

Australian Research Council (Submission 108)

Open Access and Open Data

ARC’s open access policy and practices towards open data also ensure that the results of ARC funded research are available to all parts of the innovation system. Open access publishing is the practice of providing unrestricted, free access to peer-reviewed scholarly research. The two most common ways to provide open access are through self-archiving, also known as 'green' open access (where material typically becomes available after an embargo period), and open-access journals, known as 'gold' open access (which typically have upfront charges for authors). The move towards Open Access is a worldwide trend and currently there are more than 250 academic institutions or research funding organisations mandating Open Access for publications across the world.

Open access to scholarly research is important in that a large percentage of research is paid for by taxpayers through government grants, who therefore have a right to access the results of what they have funded. Additionally, researchers and research users (including industry) may benefit from the open and free accessibility of research results.

The ARC Open Access for ARC-funded research took effect from 1 January 2013. The policy requires that any publications arising from an ARC supported research project must be deposited into an open access institutional repository within a 12 month period from the date of publication. The requirements of the policy have been incorporated into all new ARC Funding Rules and Agreements released after 1 January 2013. Throughout 2013–14 the ARC continued to roll-out its Open Access Policy (January 2013) for ARC-funded research.

Open data is the idea that publicly funded data should be freely available to everyone to use and republish as they wish, without restrictions from copyright, patents or other mechanisms of control. The goals of the open data movement are similar to those of Open Access publishing. There is a global trend towards facilitating broader and easier access to the data generated from publicly funded research.

While the ARC has not mandated an Open Data policy, the ARC is committed to maximising the benefits from ARC-funded research, including encouraging greater access to research data. In line with its responsibilities outlined in the Australian Code for Responsible Conduct of Research (2007)and international best practice, since 2007 the ARC has encouraged researchers to deposit data arising from research projects in publicly accessible repositories. In January 2014, the ARC continued to foster a culture of good data management and practices by clarifying its data management expectations. A requirement for researchers to outline how they plan to manage research data arising from ARC-funded research was added to the funding rules and supporting documentation of Discovery Program schemes for 2014 and 2015. The requirement forms part of the application process to receive funding. (page 10)

National Health and Medical Research Council (Submission 135)

4. Australia’s Research Infrastructure

NHMRC research grants fund the direct costs of research, but not indirect research costs such as rent,utilities, equipment, libraries, animal facilities, and IT infrastructure. NHMRC provides medical researchinstitutes (MRIs) with support for indirect costs at the rate of up to 20c per dollar in NHMRC grants, froma separate funding pool provided by the Commonwealth government. Higher education providers areeligible to receive Research Infrastructure Block Grants (RIBG) based on their success in attractingresearch income from competitive funding schemes.

Support for the indirect costs of research is a major issue of concern for the sector. A key issue is thelack of clear, transparent support for indirect costs of research conducted in hospitals: this is one of manyfactors that have been forcing research out of hospitals and other health care institutions. A further issueis the difference in the extent of support for indirect costs between iniversity and MRI‐based health andmedical research.

Australian Academy of Science (Submission 112)

Key points from the Academy’s submission

6. A long-term financial commitment to building and operating national research infrastructure is needed if Australia is to get the most from its past substantial investments, and if it is to undertake world leading science and research. (page 2)

Australian Association of Medical Research Institutes (AAMRI) (Submission 85)

AAMRI recommends that the Commonwealth Government replace terminating short-term

research infrastructure schemes with a 10-year investment strategy for specialist, large-scale

research facilities, including:

  • a commitment equivalent to Commonwealth funding for research infrastructure over the pastdecade (ca. $150-200 million per annum), indexed for inflation;
  • funding for the maintenance and upgrade of existing specialist research facilities to ensure they keep pace with advances in technology;
  • funding for new collaborative research facilities deemed in the national interest;
  • funding towards facility operational costs (including specialist personnel) along the lines of the very effective NCRIS program, resulting in superior service delivery and research outcomes; and
  • other positive features of the NCRIS program identified in the 2010 NCRIS Evaluation Report, such as support for collaborative facilities and leveraging of co-investment. (page 8)

Innovative Research Universities (Submission 86)

Major research infrastructure

There is no ongoing, long-term government investment in major research infrastructure. As research projects grow larger and research questions more complex, it becomes more important for investments in national, widely accessible research infrastructure to support the national research effort.

The previous government was unable to commit to a long term renewal of the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) , leaving it as a challenge for the current government to do so for the coming decade. A successful Strategy will:

•be based on regular , major , renewal of the road map for infrastructure creation and renewal;

•be coherent with research infrastructure globally, ensuring Australian based researchers’ access to internationally based resources not available here and international researchers access to Australian based infrastructure which is rare or unique;

•have a known, long term commitment of resources to implement the evolving road map;

•ensure a broad distribution of the loci of major resources to stimulate research capability across Australia;

•guarantee access to infrastructure by researchers from across Australia and internationally pursuing research of all kinds, including that driven by industry needs ;

  • balance areas of nationally strong research capability with support for research capability across developing fields; and
  • underpin the operational costs of funded infrastructure, where user charges are not sufficient. (page 7).

University of Western Sydney (Submission 21)

On 3 May 2010 the federal government adopted a Declaration of Open Government stating

The Australian Government […] iscommitted to open government based on a culture of engagement, built on better access to and use of government held information, and sustained by the innovative use of technology. (Department of Finance. Declaration of open government. Retrieved from strategy-and-governance/gov2/ declaration-of-open-government.html)

The declaration followed the United States in freeing up government data with the aim of driving innovation, improving government services and spurring economic growth.5 Most Australian states have now moved to formulate open data policies. The move to open access in government has been mirrored in government-funded research. The Australian Research Council (ARC) now requires6 that publications arising from the research it supports must be made available on an open access institutional repository within 12 months of publication. The National Health and Medical Research Council similarly requires that its funded research be made available in an open access forum.

The ARC puts the goal of open access to research, and open data strategies more broadly, this way

To maximise the benefits from research, publications resulting from research activities must be disseminated as broadly as possible to allow access by other researchers and the wider community.(Australian Research Council. (2013). ARC open access policy. Retrieved from

Moves to an open access framework for disseminating research are welcome. The University of Western Sydney strongly endorses open access to research and research data and has actively facilitated open access at the University. However, it should be noted that open access is a supply-side solution. Availability for dissemination does not equal innovation on the ground. As Janssen et al point out in a recent article

Open data on its own has little intrinsic value; the value is created by its use. Supporting use should not be viewed as secondary to publicising data. (8 Janssen, M et al. (2012). Benefits,adoption barriers and myths of opendata and open government. InformationSystems Management, 29, 258-68.)

A recent OECD working paper similarly points out that open data portals and repositories are only effective when coupled with internal structures that promote openness and attention to the needs of the end-users.9 While open access is a necessary condition of university research making an impact outside the academy, it isn’t sufficient to make it happen.

Australian universities have the capacity to be both the creators of research and the conduit to research impact. Universities— particularly regionally-responsive universities like the University of Western Sydney—have wide industry and community networks, large numbers of locally-based graduates, and significance to their regional economy. In-flows and out-flows of people network universities within the region and the nation; further, universities are networked through the transfer of knowledge with the global academic community. But while universities have capacity to support the innovative use of the research they produce, largely they do not do so. We point to three factors affecting the underuse of Australian universities’ innovation capacity.

Firstly, as the 2013 Australian Innovation System report notes, there need to be stronger incentives in place for collaboration with industry and community partners. The major incentive structures in Australian research are the ERA and National Competitive Grants Program administered by the ARC and the NHMRC.

In their current form both administering bodies rely on traditional—more heavily in the case of the former than the latter— measures of research success: scholarly publications and activities that largely remain within the circuit of the academy. So long as there is no incentive for breaking out of the circuit of the academy the innovation system will be stymied… (pages 3-4)

University of New South Wales (Submission 23)

Government policies have been very short-term and there has been a reluctance to engage inissues, or commit to programs that transcend a single term of a Government. This practice doesnot create a sustainable innovation culture. There is a critical need to have long term bi-partisanstrategic vision and commitment for research and innovation by supporting: