By Dr Don Williams MRSV

“Governments will always play a huge part in solving big problems. They set public policy and are uniquely able to provide the resources to make sure solutions reach everyone who needs them” – Bill Gates

The Australian government recently released a new National Science Statement, which has the sweeping ambition of shaping “science policy and leadership across governments, in our labs, in research institutions and in boardrooms”.¹

Put simply, the Statement describes how the government intends to support Australian science across the public and private sectors, including research and educational institutions. The Statement is accompanied by five ‘imperatives’, and a set of research priorities.²

An examination of the Statement, including the imperatives and research priorities, identifies both positive elements and potential risks. This article critically assesses the Statement, examines its links to the government’s broader policy agenda and notes that government policies announced with considerable fanfare must be matched with action to have any real impact.

The New National Science Statement

The previous National Science Statement (NSS) was issued in 2017 by a previous government – and pre-COVID-19 – so the release of a revised version is timely. The new NSS was released in August 2024, following consultation led by Chief Scientist Cathy Foley. It boldly refers to:

“A future made in Australia: Through science and innovation, Australia will develop new industries that drive a dynamic economy, provide well paid jobs, improve our quality of life, preserve our unique environment and build a future made in Australia.”

The intent of the NSS is clarified by five accompanying imperatives or broad goals, intended to “shape the national science system and national science policy, and their influence on Australia’s transformation, over the next 10 years”. These imperatives are:¹

1. Australian scientists, science institutions, and infrastructure shaping Australia’s science future
2. Science at the centre of Australian industry
3. A diverse, skilled workforce to underpin the translation of science into new industries
4. Embracing science to drive Australia’s regional and global interests
5. A science system prepared for future challenges.

As these imperatives do not identify specific priorities for research, the NSS is also accompanied by a set of National Science and Research Priorities, which “will guide Australian science and research efforts”.² The research priorities are:

• transitioning to a net zero future
• supporting healthy and thriving communities
• elevating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders knowledge systems
• protecting and restoring Australia’s environment
• building a secure and resilient nation.

Linking Science and Industry

The most important feature of the NSS and the imperatives is their explicit, strong connection with the government’s industry policy. Tellingly, the Minister for Science Ed Husic MP is also the Minister for Industry. He stated that:

“The Albanese Government wants our world-class science and research sector to help build a Future Made in Australia. We have today released Australia’s new National Science Statement and National Science and Research Priorities placing science at the forefront of our industrial transformation…We want science to drive industry growth, creating stronger businesses and more secure, well-paid jobs for Australians.”³

Linking science policy with the government’s broader policy agenda is consistent with contemporary theories of public administration, which condemn ‘silo’ thinking and claim that more integrated, whole-of-government policies produce better outcomes for the community.^4,5,6 

Pragmatically, explicitly linking science with another key government policy should provide welcome support for scientific research during the competition for attention and funding that is inevitable at senior levels of government and the bureaucracy.

The allocation of very substantial funding to industry policy should ensure that funds are available for industry-related scientific research.⁷

That said, there are risks associated with this whole-of-government approach. One of these is that a marked change of direction by a future government could ‘strand’ initiatives taken to support the current government’s industry policy. The ‘Made in Australia’ industry policy is already a subject of political debate and criticism.^8,9

Sharp changes in policy directions are not unusual in Australia’s political history, as highlighted by the divergent positions on addressing climate change adopted by governments over the past 30 years. This type of political risk is hard to mitigate, but the scientific community should be aware of it and accept the need to adapt to changed government priorities, if they arise.

A potential risk of closely linking industry and science policies is that it could lead to “science” being perceived at senior political levels as a technical input that facilitates industrial development but does not provide other value. In other words, it would be judged largely on its industrial/commercial outputs, and would not recognise the benefits associated with fundamental scientific research. Advocates for pure science may struggle to be heard.

This possibility was recognised by the Group of Eight (representing Australia’s leading research-intensive universities) in its feedback on the draft research priorities, which included a recommendation that “The Priorities should also include an explicit call for support for basic research – in itself a national Priority – given its critical importance”.¹⁰

The research priorities, and the NSS more generally, do not recognise the importance of basic research in the way recommended by the Group of Eight.

And What About Science Education?

The Royal Society of Victoria contributed to a submission during the consultation phase of the NSS as the Victorian member of the Inspiring Australia Network, calling for additional recognition and support for science teaching. The submission also argued for enhanced community engagement with science. The submission endorsed:¹¹

“…the position presented by…the Inspiring Australia Network in relation to support for science teachers and community science engagement…there is significant need for improvement in staffing numbers…A significant improvement in conditions and facilities for science teaching staff is required…together with a general elevation of the value of science teaching in our culture.
Further, a more robust and strategic commitment to resourcing the Inspiring Australia community science engagement program is needed to fulfil Australia’s commitment to UNESCO’s recommendation on Open Science.”

Recognition of these issues in the NSS is limited. The explanatory text that accompanies the imperatives indicates that the government will “Celebrate and invest in science professionals in every sector, from our science teachers in primary and high school classrooms…to our scientists making world-leading discoveries”.

The Australian government does provide some support for resources and professional development to support STEM teaching, but the level of funding is modest. For example, the 2024/5 budget allocated $34.6 million over four years to continue the delivery of several national STEM teaching resource hubs – an amount that is unlikely to be transformational.¹²

The text supporting the imperatives also states that the government will “Modernise our science agency systems and decision-making mechanisms, including to better support open science and cross disciplinary and cross institution collaborations”.

The brief references to science teaching and open science in the NSS imperatives do provide glimmers of hope. However, this hope should be tempered by the very strong efforts to link science and industry policy that pervade the NSS and the imperatives. In the political domain, the attention of high-level government decision makers will inevitably focus on making, and being seen to make, this science/industry nexus succeed. Support for science teaching and open science will be at risk of being relegated to second-tier status.

Support for Science Education: Commonwealth or State?

Science advocates need to take all possible opportunities to support science teaching, including via the NSS. That said, the potential impact of the NSS on science teaching is tempered by the reality that “Under the Australian Constitution, education in Australia is largely the responsibility of the State and Territory Governments”.¹³ Material improvements in STEM teaching at primary and secondary levels will not occur without real recognition of the issue, and the provision of corresponding funding, by state/territory governments.

Fortunately, the Victorian government has introduced some initiatives to enhance STEM teaching, including offering courses to improve the STEM skills of secondary teachers and training primary school teachers to become specialists in either science or mathematics.^14,15 These welcome initiatives suggest there is some recognition at the state level of the need to improve STEM teaching. Advocates should call for additional support from the Victorian government to build on these initiatives.

Conclusions

The release of a new NSS is timely. The NSS, and the accompanying imperatives and research priorities, closely align the Australian government’s science and industry policies. This should ensure that science is highly visible in government policy debates and is well placed in the inevitable competition for funding. However, potential risks should not be ignored. These include the possibility of future changes to industry policy, which could affect the implementation of science policy, and the potential for government decision makers to perceive science as little more than a technical input that facilitates industrial development.

The NSS does include some recognition of the need to improve science education and open science, but this may be overshadowed by the Statement’s very strong emphasis on linking science and industry policies. Also, education is largely a state responsibility, and advocates should ensure their interventions reflect this reality.

Ultimately, the real value of the NSS will only be measured when government initiatives to, for example, “Celebrate and invest in science professionals in every sector” have (or have not!) been implemented. While the risks presented warrant some attention, the Statement’s rhetoric appears to point in the right direction. However, it goes without saying that this means nothing if corresponding action, particularly the allocation of realistic funding, does not occur.

Don Williams MRSV worked for 30 years in the water quality management, wastewater regulation and water efficiency fields. Don then completed a PhD examining how planning laws influence the adoption of sustainable urban water practices. Don has a long-standing interest in how scientific knowledge informs the development of public policy.

References:

1. Australia’s National Science Statement. (2024, August 15). Department of Industry, Science and Resources. www.industry.gov.au/publications/national-science-statement-2024
2. Australia’s National Science and Research Priorities. (2024, August 15). Department of Industry, Science and Resources. www.industry.gov.au/publications/national-science-and-research-priorities-2024
   
3. Australia’s new National Science Statement and Priorities to drive industrial transformation. (2024, August 12). Ministers for the Department of Industry, Science and Resources. www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/husic/media-releases/australias-new-national-science-statement-and-priorities-drive-industrial-transformation
   
4. Karré, P. M., et al. (2012). Whole of government in theory and practice: An exploratory account of how Australian and Dutch governments deal with wicked problems in an integrated way, In Beyond fragmentation and interconnectivity, pp. 97-113. IOS Press.
   
5. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The Whole-of-Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066. doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00797.x
   
6. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2015). Policy integration in government in pursuit of the sustainable development goals. www.un.org/esa/socdev/csocd/2016/egmreport-policyintegrationjan2015.pdf
   
7. A Future Made in Australia Fact Sheet | Budget 2024-25. (2024, May 14). Australian Treasury. budget.gov.au/content/factsheets/download/factsheet-fmia.pd
   
8. Cowan, S. (2024, April 22). Back to the future: Labor revives failed policies of the past. The Centre for Independent Studies. www.cis.org.au/commentary/opinion/back-to-the-future-labor-revives-failed-policies-of-the-past/
   
9. Speers, D. (2024, April 24). The government’s plan for a future “made in Australia” has failed to win over the productivity commissioner — and that’s a problem. ABC News. http://abc.net.au/news/2024-04-25/productivity-commissioner-government-future-made-australia/103763714
   
10. Go8 submission in response to Australia’s Draft National Science and Research Priorities. (2023). Group of Eight. go8.edu.au/go8-submission-in-response-to-australias-draft-national-science-and-research-priorities 
11. Australia’s science and research priorities: submission by the Royal Society of Victoria. (2023, March 30). DISR Consultation Hub; DISR. consult.industry.gov.au/sciencepriorities1/survey/view/144
    
12. Department of Education. (2024, August 22). Support for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). Department of Education. www.education.gov.au/australian-curriculum/support-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem
    
13. DFAT. (2017). The Australian Education System – Foundation Level. http://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/australian-education-system-foundation.pdf
    
14. Department of Education. (2024, October 4). Student Resource Package – Targeted Initiatives: Secondary Sciences, Technologies and Mathematics initiative (Reference 133). Department of Education – Policy and Advisory Library. www2.education.vic.gov.au/pal/student-resource-package-srp-targeted-initiatives/guidance/secondary-mathematics
    
15. Department of Education. (2024b, October 4). Student Resource Package – Targeted Initiatives: Primary Mathematics and Science Specialists Initiative (Reference 125). Department of Education – Policy and Advisory Library. www2.education.vic.gov.au/pal/student-resource-package-srp-targeted-initiatives/guidance/secondary-mathematics