Australian Research Council calls for more ambitious ideas

University researchers should embrace AI and technological change to ‘replace drudgery with discovery’, a conference will be told today.

Business needs to invest more in research and development instead of leaving it to universities, says Assistant Minister for Productivity, Andrew Leigh.

Too many bold ideas are falling into the “valley of death’’ between discovery and commercialisation, Assistant Productivity Minister Andrew Leigh will tell a research conference on Wednesday.

Demanding greater business investment in research and development, Dr Leigh will say universities “cannot, and should not, carry the task alone’’.

“The higher education sector carries much of the nation’s research load, while business R&D lags,’’ he will tell a Group of Eight research conference in Canberra. “That imbalance leaves us with a lopsided ecosystem. Too many Australian ideas still fall into the ‘valley of death’ between discovery and commercialisation.’’

As the Albanese government reviews its entire R&D policy, Dr Leigh will flag the need for “cultural and institutional shifts’’.

“We need a greater tolerance for risk-taking and for learning from failure,’’ he will tell the conference. “And we need to value PhDs not just as academics-in-waiting, but as assets to business, government and society.’’

Assistant Minister for Productivity Andrew Leigh is calling for greater collaboration between academia and industry. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Dr Leigh says artificial intelligence can boost productivity and “replace drudgery with discovery’’.

“Productivity … is not measured by the number of hours we put in, but by how much value we create in those hours,’’ he will say. “It is not about fewer jobs, but more interesting jobs.

“Productivity turns disruption into opportunity, replacing drudgery with discovery.’’

Calling for greater collaboration between industry and academia, Dr Leigh will champion universities for “carrying new ideas further and faster’’.

“Universities, businesses and government must work together to ensure that research does not remain trapped in labs and journals, but spreads through every workplace and community,’’ he will say.

“Australia’s research-intensive universities … produce the graduates who will carry new skills into the workforce (and) train the scientists who push the frontier.’’

The federal government has yet to release the Australian Research Council review of research funding to universities, which was initially due in June.

But the ARC has told the federal Industry Department’s strategic review of R&D that research does not always need a direct industrial application to be valuable.

“There is a specific need to fund a broad and diverse range of early stage research that encourages a culture of curiosity, discovery and innovation,’’ ARC chairman Peter Shergold has told the Industry ­Department. “In the current global environment, it is vital that Australia supports sovereign research capability.

“The ARC is proposing that a portion of ARC funding could be allocated to a dedicated scheme closely targeted at priority areas, balanced with a strong focus on ­investigator-led research.’’

Professor Shergold said the ARC – which distributes $1bn a year in research funding to universities – is proposing to remove the “perceived divide’’ between basic research and applied research.

He said the ARC wanted ­greater emphasis on funding “new, ambitious research … to address the criticism that past ARC schemes have rewarded incrementalism over innovation’’.

ARC chair Peter Shergold is championing ‘bolder, more ambitious’’ research. Picture: NewsWire / Monique Harmer

Professor Shergold said the ARC distributed just 7 per cent of the federal government’s total R&D expenditure, and called for better co-ordination between government agencies that allocate taxpayer funding.

“Those funds have become spread too thinly across too many schemes and objectives,’’ his submission states.

The Industry Department, which has received nearly 500 submissions to its sweeping review, agrees in its latest discussion paper that “there are too many programs, spread too thinly’’.

“Complex and stringent regulations’’ are slowing down ­research, development and innovation, it warns, “creating a secondary market of professional grant writers and consultants’’.

“The amount spent on overheads and administration could be better spent on growing our ­opportunities, capacity and companies,’’ it states.

“Current public funding models, business R&D incentives and research metrics favour safe, incremental research, discouraging bold or experimental ideas.’’