Australian research grant reforms gain political support

Promised reforms to the Australian Research Council (ARC) appear likely to proceed after a key political party pledged support, while pressing for more funding.

The Greens hailed the government’s acceptance of all 10 recommendations from a review of the ARC as “a victory for the research community”. With seven of the 10 recommendations requiring legislative change, Greens endorsement gives the government all but two of the Senate votes it needs to pass amendments.

The proposals would clarify the agency’s role, boost its funding certainty and enshrine its independence under a board of up to seven people. The board would appoint the ARC’s chief executive and members of key committees, including the “college of experts” who review grant applications.

The board would also approve grant recommendations and advise the education minister on “priorities, policies and strategies”, according to the government’s response to the review. The minister’s role would be restricted to appointing board members, approving nationally significant grant schemes and research priorities, and setting guidelines, expectations and key performance measures.

The new arrangements would restrict ARC grants to “Australian universities and their partners”, formally excluding other organisations from competing for funding, with eligibility extended to basic and applied research “but not experimental development”. The agency’s role would also include “shaping the national research landscape…including in relation to research integrity” and helping universities attract and retain “talented” academics.

A legislated “split” between collaborative and investigator-led research would be removed, and an agreed indexation formula would be applied to ARC grants. This would make funding of the council’s work more “durable”, with annual legislation no longer needed to align its finances with inflation. Grant opportunities for Indigenous academics would also be expanded and a committee would be established to consult with them and their research partners.

The ARC’s chief executive, Judi Zielke, said the agency was already working to implement the recommendations that did not require legislative change, such as a reduction in the “administrative burden” for researchers and institutions. “We are also consulting with Indigenous researchers regarding the establishment of an ARC Indigenous Forum,” she said.

Science & Technology Australia said the proposals would foster deeper partnerships with Indigenous researchers and communities. “Curbing the temptation for ministers to meddle in complex research is a powerful positive reform,” added CEO Misha Schubert.

The Australian Academy of Science said the watering down of ministerial grant veto powers would “bring great relief to our nation’s research community”. The Greens said ending political interference was “key to a thriving and independent research sector”.

“But so is sufficient funding, which the government has so far failed to address in both the ARC Review and the Universities Accord,” said the party’s education spokeswoman, Mehreen Faruqi. “Australian research…will never reach its full potential without substantial, long-term public funding.”

Universities Australia said that as a proportion of gross domestic product (GDP), government spending on research and development had never been lower. “This will continue to affect Australia’s productivity…and overall economic performance,” said chief executive Catriona Jackson.

The Group of Eight echoed the call. “We now need to address the structural issues around how research is supported to drive Australia towards a national target of 3 per cent of GDP,” said chief executive Vicki Thomson.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com