Table Of Content

SYMPOSIUM ON SCIENCE POLICY 47 Its priorities are reflected in the dollars provided There are those thinking about the topic here. for individual R&D sectors, and this process The Industry Commission has canvassed the con¬ ensures a continual ‘rebalancing of the national cept of contestable funding for CSIRO —although research portfolio’ to reflect future needs —not is that feasible if research funding for others is not past expenditure patterns. Some continuity is contestable? inherent in the methodology, because sectoral The Senate has attacked CSIRO for moving funding strategics are on a five-year rolling basis. funding between topic areas; but the Senate sees • There has been an organisational restructuring funding ‘in terms of the pork-barrel, not science of those who supply the science. DSIR is no priorities’. Federally, policy ideas tend to originate more. A series of Crown research institutes has outside Government per se, largely in CSIRO. been erected in its stead; and it will be their At the State level, research is handled within the individual responsibilities to remain viable. bureaucracy —but science in general is a ‘basket (This restructuring is more significant in the case’ in the State system. NZ context than would be the case here, Returning now to New Zealand, the benefits because universities and industry provide pro¬ flowing from the new ways of handling science portionately only half as much research as policy and allocating research funds are several: in Australia. One of Government’s aims is to • Government confidence in science has been .use its funding to leverage-up the low level of restored; business investment.) • sustained growth in science funding is assured — The reform process continues. Over the next probably for 15 years; five years, an effort will be made to: • science has been able to escape history and embrace the future; and • Get the long-term strategic framework right. • imperatives for user uptake and investment have It is the intention to develop a 15-year planning been created. (There must be a commitment horizon supplemented by 5-year priority state¬ from the private sector in an area for it to ments. There will be no change in the 5-year attract increased funding.) funding limit. • Evaluate investments. Different areas of policy Finally, the lessons of the new way are: interest will need to be allocated different levels • direct and comprehensive funding means that of funding; and different evaluation methods will bad science, and that without priority, has need to be developed to assess the economic/ nowhere to hide; social/cnvironmental outcomes of past funding • Government thinks better when it is a strategic initiatives. investor and shareholder; • Shift the focus to the demand side. Less emphasis • treasury-driven simple-mindedness is avoided; will be given to science policy and more to and technology policy. • selective investment helps to avoid short-termism and ‘safe science’. The Minister cannot direct the placement of funds —only enunciate priorities. All Government funding is distributed through contracts with the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology; and these contracts are for a maximum of five Professor Michael Pitman obe faa years —although longer-term horizons can be SCIENCE POLICY: LOOKING FORWARD enunciated. Basic research has survived, despite fears at the outset. Summary Clearly, the reinvention of government in New Zealand (accountability/labour and finance Science policy is not static but needs to evolve reform/corporatisation/privatisation) has led to as the context for using science changes and as the reinvention of the science funding system. different issues need to be addressed. The past The problem in Australia is the lack of a strategic year has been marked by a number of studies or view for science. Without that, we cannot have consultations such as the IC Report, the ASTEC a science policy. Some see Australia’s pluralistic foresight study, CSIRO’s futures papers and the Fedcral/State system as not requiring a policy lead up to the Innovation Statement due later for science. But all countries need answers to this year. These consultations have collected a the questions: Why invest?/In what?/What is range of views on current policy and how it the required outcome? might develop. 48 SYMPOSIUM ON SCIENCE POLICY ASTEC has had a major study in progress on • Science Policy is not research policy —it involves Foresight or Matching Science and Technology to ‘buying’ new technology as well as ‘making’ or Future Needs. This study has suggested scenarios producing it domestically. in 2010 as imaginary —but possible futures in order • Science is a component of virtually all govern¬ to ask when developments might take place in ment policies: science and technology and wrhat issues might — industry; become most important. — trade; The study is conducting a series of ‘Partner¬ — agriculture; ships’ in a number of areas such as the information — health/medical; and communications industry, shipping, urban — defence; water supply and health. ASTEC is also seeking — environment; and the views of youth. It is also conducting round¬ — social. table discussions on key issues. One took place • Need to determine where science fits in each. on 24 May in Sydney on the science system of • Answer is different in each case so a generic the future. ‘Science Policy’ is not necessarily relevant. ASTEC’s scenario for 2010 challenged the discussion by proposing that by this time the use Science Policy —what it is not/should not be of Internet and communications technology had produced many changes in learning. Universities • A focus on inputs were internationally open and students could shop — Dollars do not equate to quality or effective¬ around for courses. It was suggested that research ness. had also become more international and multi¬ — Business expenditure should be dictated by disciplinary using Internet; CSIRO had become an industry structure and business plans, not international agency (a proposition that attracted international comparisons (as useful as a some interest from the press); industry carried out policy on garden tools, street cleaning or more R&D but Government support for R&D sporting attendance). had stayed about the same in real terms as • Balancing public and private outlays now, making funding more competitive and linked — Private outlay on science is a business decision more tightly to the Governments needs, such as based on competing investment opportunities. the environment. — Public expenditure is a political decision based New technologies and discovery in medicine had on competing priorities and the inertia inherent responded to the search for prevention rather than in an existing establishment. cure. There are, of course, other futures. • Picking winners/setting priorities The aim of these discussions is not to predict — Criteria to be used by those not the users of the future but to use optional futures to challenge outcomes are unclear. the extent that the present system can adapt to — Business may be stupid or short-sighted but trends that can already be detected, such as the in the end it lives with the consequences. role of information technology, the emergence — Government has role to consult and co¬ of APEC and importance given to environmental ordinate public interest science. values. • Creating jobs —for scientists, tax specialists, My aim today is to challenge thinking about lawyers, accountants, snake-oil salesmen science policy —both policy for science and science — Any policy measure intentionally or uninten¬ for policy by emphasising that policy —or strategy tionally having a primary impact of this nature — needs to take the context of the future into should be abandoned. account. Science Policy—what it should be • Creating awareness/interest — Community fear or apathy makes political Mr Peter J. Laver fts support for science difficult. — Attitudes significantly influenced by the school AN INDUSTRY EVALUATION OF education system. AUSTRALIAN SCIENCE POLICY — Science lacks the inherent potential for popular acclaim/rewards of other fields of endeavour. The place of Science Policy • Reducing risk/leveraging returns • Science Policy is not an end in itself. — Investments of any type are rarely simply ‘go’/