|
Who Was There to Lead the Charge That
Took Us to the Rear? |
When we almost had 'em but the issue still was in doubt, who suggested the retreat that turned it oin a rout? Why it wuz JU-BI-LA-TION T. CORN-PONE, Old "Tattered and Torn Pone" Jubilation T. Cornpone, he kept us hidin' out.-
Two
months ago the Australia Bureau of Statistics released a report with the catchy
title
8111.0 Research and Experimental Development, Higher Education Organisations,
Australia. About the only ones who picked it up and ran with it were
the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee who released a
four page document
highlighting the main points among which were included:
Note that the figures are not adjusted for inflation, and while investment in higher education research and development has risen 9% since 1998, over the same period GDP has risen 3.5% per annum. But the jarring statistic is that "pure basic research" has declined 16% over the four years 1996 - 2000 and in Australia currently such fundamental research is carried out almost exclusively at our universities.
But the Minister for Education, Science and Training, Brendan Nelson, has an interesting defense of the relative decline of support for higher education research and development (HERD). "While HERD as a percentage of GDP has marginally decreased from 0.43% to 0.41%, this should be seen more as a reflection of the strength of the Australian economy, which has outpaced many other economies, rather than as a decline in R&D expenditure." Considering that Australia spends 1.4% of GDP for overall research and development while the mean for the OECD nations is just over 2%, that's a spin Shane Warne would be proud of.
The minister continues, "I recognise the importance of R&D in Australia's university sector, and the Government's injection of $3 billion over five years for innovation and research through Backing Australia's Ability is proof of our commitment in this area." It is $2.9 billion but what's $100 million here or there. However, of far greater consequence is that the Group of Eight have demonstrated that the infusion will hold R&D as a percentage of GDP stagnant, i.e. it halts what has been an insidious decline since 1996. Meanwhile our cohort nations are upping the ante now looking toward committing 3% of GDP to R&D. Furthermore, Australia's commitment to fundamental research continues to decline in real terms with the consequent degeneration of research and learning at our universities which in turn accelerates the decline of resources to all sectors of the nation dependent on a sound foundation of knowledge.
The government has made a point of, "HERD as a percentage of GDP is 0.41%, which compares favourably with other OECD countries, and is higher than figures recorded for Germany (0.40%), the USA (0.37%), and France (0.36%)." But neglects to mention that from 1998 to 2000 we have dropped from fourth to sixth position or that the economic climate in nations such as the USA is much more conducive for business investment in R&D. Devising such a climate is every bit as important an investment by government in R&D as is direct investment. Currently incentives for Australian private enterprise to invest substantively in research are clearly grossly inadequate and there is no indication that is about to change significantly.
Within the European Union there is increasing awareness that its members must develop a vital federation for research and do so quickly if they are not do be left to increasing relative underdevelopment. And it has become evident that Switzerland is beginning to feel increasingly disquieted in its self imposed isolation from the EU. In all likelihood it will join within the decade. Recently Science ( June 7) reported, "A decade of stagnation has sent Swiss science into a downward spiral that only broad reforms and a massive infusion of funds can reverse. That diagnosis [was] offered last week by the Swiss government's science advisory body. [W]hether leaders of the Swiss Federal Council, the government's executive branch, are prepared to prescribe strong medicine [remains to be seen]." Among other reforms the report recommends, "shoring up support for long-term basic research, and increasing the science and technology budget by 10% a year from 2004 to 2007." Cogently the report warns, "against sacrificing long-term research for the sake of the more politically expedient targeted research programs." Perhaps our minister for science, Peter McGauran, in probing for research priorities might take note. Perhaps Dr. Nelson might sally forth from his intellectually defensive ministerial bastion and pay a visit to Gottfried Schatz, president of the Swiss Science and Technology Council and have a chat. After all Switzerland is a delightful place to visit in early summer.
It is become increasingly obvious that if we
are to remain a modern nation we shall have to become a member of an "R&D
consortium". But to be an influential member, we must being something worthwhile
to the table. We'd best get cracking -- time really isn't on our side.
With our amminition gone and faced with utter defeat, who was it that burned the
crops and left us with nothin to eat? Why it wuz JU-BI-LA-TION T. CORN-PONE, Old
"September Morn pone", Jubilation T. Cornpone- the pants blown off his seat.
Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web