Australia's Chief Scientist Launches His Position Paper: "STEM in the National Interest: A Strategic Approach. (August 1, 2013)

Australia's Chief Scientist, Professor Ian Chubb, with an address to the National Press Club, yesterday launched his position paper on a national strategy for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). A video of the address can be watched Here and the transcript is available here.

The 36-page position paper Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics in the National Interest: A Strategic Approach (July 2013) is also available for download.

We note here that the paper opens on a note of dark humour: This paper has been prepared by the Office of the Chief Scientist. The contents of this paper do not indicate commitment by the Australian Government or Office of the Chief Scientist to a particular course of action. The Australian Government and the Office of the Chief Scientist accept no responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the content. This document is available online at http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/STEMstrategy290713FINALweb.pdf.

The position paper is to all intents a hand waving exercise, and admittedly so. Note Professor Chubb's intention to present a "suitably amended version” of the position paper to PMSEIC, the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council at a future meeting in the hope that if approved, detailed implementation would be delegated to appropriate governmental departments and agencies.

Below excerpts from Professor Chubb's speech:

[W]hat sort of Australia do we want? Do we want to build one that provides the coming generations with the opportunities and the lifestyle that many of us have enjoyed, or do we not particularly care?

 I am firmly in the camp that thinks we have to act. I think that we have to take as much control of our destiny as we can. Because I think that if we don’t, we will be left behind...  the countries that we might compare ourselves with show a sense of urgency – an anxiety if you like – about not being left behind... And they are aiming to do that by attending to their STEM enterprise – all of it, education, research and innovation... The US has been particularly active. The most recent example is a 5–year strategic plan presented to the National Science and Technology Council in May 2013.

A report by the Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA) summarises the overall position as follows: Most nations are closely focused on advancing STEM, and some have evolved dynamic, potent and productive strategies. In world terms, Australia is positioned not far below the top group, but lacks the national urgency found in the United States, East Asia and much of Western Europe, and runs the risk of being left behind.

[T]he [US] National Science and Technology Council (which is a Cabinet-level Council chaired by the President, [is] "the principal means within the executive branch to coordinate science and technology policy across the diverse entities that make up the Federal research and development enterprise…. The Council prepares research and development strategies that are coordinated across Federal agencies to form investment packages aimed at accomplishing multiple national goals".

Our paper does make the point that the Australian federation has no such Council, and suggests that the Prime Minister’s Science Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC), could be structured and referenced to undertake the role if there is no wish to create a new body.

I do think that it will take sensible and sensitive coordination – and strategic and sensitive intervention by governments.

The performance of our students would be high. And the disciplines that underpin STEM would be strong and taught with inspiration by teachers who are supported to keep abreast of their field – a regular exposure to contemporary knowledge in their disciplines.

By 2025 we should have reached a point where Australians will better understand and value the science they use in everyday life, and where the STEM enterprise will be widely accepted as a central and visible source of solutions to societal challenges.

We will support our best researchers at a level that will enable them to take a place alongside their best international peers. Australian STEM will be deeply and strategically connected globally, and we will be offering the world much.

[I]f you are looking for targets in our paper, and decimal points, or even offsets, you will be disappointed. This is a call for a Strategy... what we need now is some persistence; some medium to long-termism – well beyond the exigencies of the moment and this or that terminating program.

Tony Blair then PM of the UK once said in an address to the Royal Society: "The benefits of science will only be exploited through a renewed compact between science and society, based on a proper understanding of what science is trying to achieve.. Science doesn’t replace moral judgement. It just extends the context of knowledge within which moral judgements are made. It allows us to do more, but it doesn’t tell us whether doing more is right or wrong."

I have argued for some time (though not as elegantly as Tony Blair) that STEM will be of most benefit to the community when it operates with a social licence from the community. In other words a licence provided when the community understands the why, the what, by whom and for what purpose – and has confidence in the safeguards and the regulations.

Professor Chubb then explained how understanding of and support for STEM  in the population could be brought about, thereby keeping Australia part of the First World group of nations.

The first element that brings it all together is education – where it all begins.

The second element is STEM and new knowledge. [In] an open letter to the then U.S. President from 21 leaders of US industry. They wrote: "History has shown that it is federally sponsored research that provides the truly ‘patient’ capital needed to carry out basic research and create an environment for the inspired risk-taking that is essential to technological discovery."

The third element is STEM and innovation. We need to create better links between business and publicly funded research agencies and universities. And we need to ensure that there is a larger and better-prepared STEM-skilled workforce to work with our industries.

The fourth element is STEM and influence. Our approach should be led by strategic and funded government-to-government alliances and by leveraging STEM and its global reach to strengthen Australia’s position and our opportunity to contribute to a better world.

Of course to state the obvious the devil is in the detail and in all probability, like Godot, it is unlikely to eventuate.