Submission from the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute

Introduction

The Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute (AMSI), established in 2002, is a national, collaborative venture supporting the mathematical sciences.

As a general comment the Discussion Paper captures the issues and the widespread nature of the challenges. However it appears to lack a sense of urgency. In particular it takes a very global view and therefore does not address concerns about specific disciplines, especially small and strategic ones that are of vital importance to Australia.

AMSI has been involved in the case study for mathematics and statistics. Although the case study has not yet been seen, it is expected that it will document a number of serious concerns in regard to the mathematical sciences and the impact this is likely to have on research across disciplines, including many in the social sciences and humanities.

In the comments below the discussion questions are used as a framework for raising some of these concerns concentrate on issues that cross boundaries.

Consultation Questions

Q1: Do the issues identified adequately capture the challenges facing Australia in adapting to the changing nature of employer demand and meeting its innovation aspirations over the next decade? If not, what other challenges should be considered?

The issues capture the challenges at research end. However, these cannot be isolated from those concerned with the pipeline—what is happening at the schools and undergraduate level. While it is not the purpose of this strategy to address them, it should note the importance of graduates moving into research having excellent English skills and appropriate mathematical and statistical skills. The importance of the latter to non-science areas such as the social sciences and economics also needs to be recognized. These foundation skills are very dependent on school education and the link should at least be noted.

Q2: Do the issues identified adequately capture the opportunities available to Australia to better respond to the changing nature of employer demand in Australia and meet national innovation aspirations? If not, what other opportunities should be considered?

The issues don’t address the highly competitive nature of the global market for some discipline areas. The APA stipend of $22,500 is a case in point. The mean starting salary of a mathematics or statistics three-year graduate is about $50,000 meaning that good graduates in high demand areas can attract a starting salary of about four times this. For earth sciences graduates it is higher again. While top-up scholarships are sometimes available, it is likely that the current APA stipend needs to better reflect starting salaries for graduates.

There is also a need to be more proactive in recruiting good students from overseas. The Canadian MITACS program Globalink targets excellent graduates from India but such a program would not have to focus on India. MITACS is also proactive in promoting industry research.

In summary, there are actions that other nations are taking and, to be competitive, Australia is going to have to be more aggressive in attracting talent. This will need to be supplemented by hassle-free, friendly immigration.

Q3: Do the issues identified adequately capture the challenges facing Australia in delivering required levels of research skills to its workforce over the next decade? If not, what other challenges should be considered?

There is a circular problem here. Delivering the ‘required levels of research skills’ requires adequate staff capable of delivering the training. Statistics, entomology and geophysics would be examples where this is problematic. These are just three examples of disciplines that are important to Australia but need to be rebuilt at the university level before the number of HD research students is likely to increase.

Q4: Do the issues identified adequately capture the opportunities available to Australia to enhance its supply of research skills over the next decade? If not, what other opportunities should be considered?

The UK has had special funding for strategic disciplines of national importance, especially small disciplines. Such a fund could be established to support the problematic areas such as those identified above. This could involve additional funding to a single university to improve research training staff and highly attractive scholarships that would encourage applicants for HDs from across Australia and from overseas.

Q5: Do the issues identified adequately capture the challenges facing Australia in providing productive and viable career paths to its researchers over the next decade and promoting them adequately? If not, what other challenges should be considered?

The level of salaries and research support must match that is available to researchers in other countries, including issues related to tenure. In recent years this has mainly related to the USA but countries such as China are now aggressively recruiting. This does not seem to be captured.

Q6: Do the issues identified adequately capture the opportunities available to Australia to better support researchers at the different stages of their careers over the next decade? If not, what other opportunities should be considered?

See Q5—Australia has to match the conditions available in the international market for researchers. This is particularly so in areas of national importance such as geophysics and disciplines that underpin research and innovation in many other areas such as the mathematical and physical sciences.

Q7: Are the priority areas for action outlined in Table 1 the right ones? What other priorities should be identified?

-

Q8: Does the allocation of responsibilities for priority areas and actions outlined in Table 1 adequately capture the roles of all parties? Are there any issues relating to the allocation of responsibilities that need to be considered?

-

Q9: Are the timeframes outlined in Table 1 appropriate? Are there any priority areas that require more immediate or longer-term action?

The broad areas for action and timelines are appropriate as a general framework. What is missing is the need to target some crucial areas that are fundamental to Australia. The priorities for action are too broad and not all discipline specific issues can be dealt with simultaneously.

The original Submission is also available via PDF