Submission to
Review of National Innovation
Systems
July 2008
The National University of Inland Australia
Response to the Review of Higher Education
Charles Sturt University
1|P a g e
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
LETTER OF SUBMISSION
Professor Ian Goulter Vice‐Chancellor Charles Sturt University The Grange, Panorama Avenue BATHURST NSW 2795 SUBMISSION TO THE REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEM
Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the review of the National Innovation System. This review and its outcomes are vitally important for addressing the future challenges for our nation in environment, health, economy and social inclusion and positioning Australia as a significant international contributor to the creation of new knowledge for the advancement of the society in general. Australia faces significant problems, challenges and issues and appropriate human and infrastructure resources need to be harnessed to address these issues within an integrated framework. I wish the Panel the best in this important endeavour and look forward to reading the conclusions of the Panel in due course. Yours sincerely Professor Ian Goulter VICE‐CHANCELLOR Page | 2
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS AND AFFILIATIONS
Charles Sturt University is a statutory corporation established by the NSW Government under the Charles Sturt University Act 1989 with the object of promoting, within the limits of the University’s resources, scholarship, research, free inquiry, the interaction of research and teaching, and academic excellence. Charles Sturt University is a participant in a number of Australian Research Council Special Research Centres and Cooperative Research Centres (see listing under ‘Capability Statement’ on page 14). As a public university and research institution, Charles Sturt University is the recipient of grants from a range of Commonwealth funding programs and works with a number of Research and Development Corporations to promote research and innovation. Page | 3
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
INTRODUCTION
The Review of the National Innovation System Call for Submissions paper posits the question: What sort of outcomes do we want to secure for Australia over the next ten years, and beyond. Against such goals, what do we need to be doing now? Fundamentally, a National Innovation System should support excellence in research and innovation activities wherever they occur, whether that is in inland Australian, metropolitan cities or regional centres. Charles Sturt University strongly supports collaboration and acknowledges that ground breaking research most often occurs at the intersection of disciplinary boundaries i.e. multidisciplinary research. STRATEGIC CONTEXT
The paper acknowledges that a major driver of change of national innovation policy includes “…finding solutions to global and national challenges like climate change, future energy sources, water supply, and a healthy population.” These factors not only provide a focus for the identification of the priorities for a National Innovation System, but also define the context in which a National Innovation System must be delivered. In defining the National Innovation System, it is essential that it is able to simultaneously support and advance relevant other national priorities to ensure the overall approach of Government is comprehensive and coherent. Climate change, water and energy availability will force us to re‐think the way we use natural resources and its impact on the broader environment and community health. It will require us to re‐think the way our populations are distributed across the nation as we seek ways to reduce the impact of unnecessary transportation of produce and create viable sustainable energy systems to support whole populations. Furthermore, human population health will, in this context, challenge us to tap into the inventiveness of our workforces and communities, to generate a stronger culture of personal and community responsibility for well‐being and to innovate in the way we deliver services to more dispersed populations across our country. These critical challenges require our governments and the nation to rethink existing strategies to ensure equitable access to health and related services, sustainable living communities and reduced environmental footprints. Page | 4
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
OBJECTS OF INNOVATION
Charles Sturt University is of the view that the objects of Innovation should be defined to provide a framework to drive innovation decision making and to evaluate the effectiveness of policies and programs. As noted in the paper, “innovation goal posts keep shifting [and Australia] needs a capacity for innovating that can evolve over time and respond to changing circumstances.” While national innovation priorities are an important way of communicating tangible expectations to the community and stakeholders, they tend to be focussed on the short‐medium term and do not provide a useful long term framework within which to understand the role of innovation in national social and economic development. Defining the objects of a National Innovation System is accordingly a first step in building community understanding of the role of innovation in social and economic development of the nation. In doing so, it is important to recognise the critical role played by the community in supporting investment in innovation, accepting the risks of this investment and embracing the transformative capabilities of innovation. For example, the resistance to the roll out of genetically modified crops, the failure to embrace wide‐scale implementation of waste water reuse technologies and the hesitancy in some communities regarding water fluoridisation, are contemporary and real examples of the need to garner and sustain community support for innovations that will impact deeply on the achievement of national social and economic goals – particularly in light of the significant structural adjustments that might be anticipated as the world confronts the issues of water, food and energy insecurity into the future. National innovation therefore needs to focus on community well‐being as its primary goal and priorities and programs must relate to community well‐being in its local, national and international dimensions. Government must also articulate and validate innovation goals and their relationship to community well‐being in order to sustain and grow support for innovation, and investment in innovation. Defining innovation objects will support more effective harmonisation across National Research Priorities, National Innovation Priorities and broader national objectives. NATIONAL PRIORITIES
The Government presently has four National Research Priorities: • An Environmentally Sustainable Australia • Promoting and Maintaining Good Health • Frontier Technologies for Building and Transforming Australian Industries • Safeguarding Australia Page | 5
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
It is important for there to be an alignment of national innovation priorities to research priorities, as well as broader national priorities, to ensure effective coordination of resources and to communicate a sense of coherence and common purpose to the community. Charles Sturt University is of the view that the existing national research priorities should be updated to reflect short to medium term priorities for innovation. For example, Charles Sturt University is of the view that the national innovation priorities could include: • Environmental Sustainability: Water and Food Security; Population Management • Health: Building Community Resilience; Delivery of Quality Health Services to Dispersed and Remote Communities • Economy: Sustaining and Growing Internationally Competitive Industries; Maximising Micro‐Innovation through Professional Skills Development; Improving Productivity in Export Industries • Social Inclusion: Promoting Social Harmony and Inter‐personal Respect; Improving Access and Delivery of Human and Education Services Charles Sturt University is of the view that the National Innovation System should have transparent mechanisms which are used to clearly identify, promulgate and monitor the major problems that need to be addressed by Australian academics and researchers. This should be produced through a consultative process independent of Government and involve community consultation (perhaps feeding from the 2020 Summit) for final determination by Government. REGIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS
As an inland University, Charles Sturt University has a particular interest in the transformative capacity of innovation and research investment for regional communities. According to Morgan, National Innovation Systems are “very often based on distinctive subnational formations, be they local clusters or core regions” (Morgan, 2004, 13). Government policy has often played a dual role in stimulating successful innovation and social and economic development in both metropolitan and regional areas. Investments in science and technology parks, R&D precincts and similar initiatives have aimed to stimulate economic growth and attract population movements, whilst also encouraging the growth of innovation activity. In addressing broader national priorities in relation to regional economic development, climate change, water and food security and human services, it is important to acknowledge the demonstrable impact of investment in innovation and research in specific geographic locations. Recent studies by universities on the regional economic impact of teaching and research activities provide a compelling case for investment in non‐metropolitan universities as a means not only to promote economic development, but to attract the essential human capital (such a health workers and other professionals) to sustain regional communities and Page | 6
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
economies (see ‘Human Capital’ for further comment on the role of education in micro‐
innovation). While acknowledging these benefits, a National Innovation System must focus on facilitating genuine innovation that supports community well‐being, and not be used to support goals that should be addressed by other means. However, recent research has identified a number of factors essential to the success of regional innovation systems in small to medium sized regions. Research suggests that proximity is a critical factor in generating innovation, particularly in the early stages of knowledge creation. Morgan argues that, notwithstanding the enabling capacities of information and communication technologies, it fails to facilitate “…social reciprocity, which is the essential prerequisite for deep learning” (Morgan, 2004, 5). He identifies factors such as face to face communication, mutual understanding, cooperation and trust as necessary underpinning of learning and innovation (Morgan, 2004, 8). He argues that “…one of the most serious gaps in the classical [National Innovation System] literature was its silence on subnational institutions, mechanisms which can play an important role as bridging institutions in diffusing knowledge and keeping local firms abreast of new practices” (citing Cooke and Morgan, 1994, 1998). In the agricultural context, extension activities and industry collaborative research are a good example of how universities build understanding, and encourage the take‐up, of new innovations. Commenting on the Silicon Valley, Brown and Duguid state (quoted in Morgan, 2004, 12): For the ecology to flourish .. it evidently needs not just a range of capabilities, but a close range. The informal links … develop directly and in close quarters. In the Valley, people live in and out of each other’s pockets, and this helps then see what’s doing, what’s doable, and what’s not being done. This close proximity not only shows how to a attack a particular niche, it provides the ability to see a niche before it is visible to the eyes … density of firms, practices and practitioners also promotes reliable risk – and trust – assessment.” Charles Sturt University’s own experience supports the view that facilitating co‐location and interaction across publicly funded research bodies and private sector actors in the agricultural sector (through the National Wine and Grape Industry Centre, for example) has been essential not only to the production of knowledge, but also to its application and diffusion. In relation to agriculture in particular, in a recently published agenda for agricultural research Charles Sturt University has argued for “… the consolidation of public investment in agricultural education and research in rural public universities as a means to reduce duplication, improve cost effectiveness, enhance linkages between education, research and extension, build the international standards of agricultural education and research and expand the domestic and international market for Australian agricultural programs.” (CSU, Growing our Communities, 2007, p11). This proposal reflects concerns about the geographic disconnectedness of agricultural research, agricultural education and agricultural extension. Page | 7
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
Charles Sturt University is of the view that the National Innovation System should be capable of supporting robust Regional Innovation Systems at the sub‐national level, including the geographic consolidation of innovation capabilities in areas relevant to the research being undertaken. Critical to the development of a robust Regional Innovation System, in this framework, is targeted investment in infrastructure and a review of economic incentives (payroll tax, stamp duty and R&D Tax Concessions) to promote geographic co‐
location of private and public research connected to where research outcomes will be applied. This is not to suggest that research should only be undertaken where it has an immediate geographic relevance (all research and innovation builds national social and economic capacity). It is important, however, to ensure the most effective return on investment from the National Innovation System. Hence, the location of research must maximise the capacity for knowledge production, application and diffusion and not be bound by existing geographic concentrations. MULTIDISCIPLINARITY
Innovation is best developed by multidisciplinary teams and Australia needs a more formal way of recognising and supporting multi‐disciplinarity. Specific areas of research such as rivers, water, sustainability, regional social and economic communities, indigenous health are areas where cross‐disciplinary teams are best positioned to work collaboratively to address these significant problems. In addressing multidisciplinarity, it is important to note the critical role that the arts, humanities and social sciences play in providing solutions to the complex problems (e.g. water and sustainable communities, and indigenous health and welfare) that form critical components of the objects we propose for the National Innovation System. Current policy frameworks have appeared to marginalise or exclude these important disciplines from the innovation agenda and this should be addressed. The Commonwealth Government’s public policy driver for research for the past 10 years has been built around the principle of “collaboration” and “cooperation” and this should be enhanced, particularly with regards to international collaboration. The development of networks and the funding of shared infrastructure have underpinned this, however, Charles Sturt University is of the view that this system should be boosted with the establishment of a Global Alliance Development Scheme. Page | 8
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
HUMAN CAPITAL
Charles Sturt University is of the view that a highly trained workforce is essential to the creation, application and diffusion of knowledge. Mowrey and Sampat argue that the: “… joint production of trained personnel and advanced research may be more effective than specialization in one or the other activity. For example, the movement of trained personnel into industrial or other occupations can be a powerful mechanism for diffusion of scientific research, and demands from students and their prospective employers for ‘relevance’ in the curriculum can strengthen links between the academic research agenda and the needs of society.” (Mowrey and Sampat, 2003, 4). The extension of knowledge to undergraduate and postgraduate students by universities, and knowledge transfers between universities and private collaborators, create and sustain the knowledge workforce that supports continuous micro‐innovations in the workplace environment. Equipping graduates with the necessary innovation skills through exposure to research environments at University is essential to addressing critical innovations in health delivery and promotion, export expansion and agricultural extension on the ground. The importance of graduate skills for continuous innovation within society was highlighted by Mejia who claimed that the graduates employed in Silicon Valley were the single most influential factor in its innovative capacity and success: “While the transfer of technology takes many forms, the most common form is the education and technical know‐how that students take with them when they graduate. That form is overlooked in discussions about Silicon Valley and start‐ups. But, it is one that probably has the greatest fiscal and social impact on the broader economy because a lot of bright young people are being put to work to create value for existing companies by improving existing products and creating new ones. In a word, they are the young innovators that will create the next generation of wireless phones, digital cameras, cancer therapeutics, and many other great things” (Mejia, 2001, 6). Charles Sturt University strongly recommends that the National Innovation System acknowledges the essential role of education in continuous innovation and that the link between education and research is strengthened to ensure graduates have the necessary skills to transfer and apply knowledge and innovation into the workplace environment. Equally, a National Innovation System needs to bring creative intellects together. We need to enhance our understanding of what makes a creative individual and work systematically at all levels of education to support and develop creativity and innovation. Research undertaken by Proctor and Burnett (2004) has identified characteristics and descriptors for creativity and described each in terms of the specific behaviours indicative of creativity. Page | 9
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
The Creativity Checklist Descriptors and Behaviours/Performance Indicators Descriptor 1. Fluent Thinker Behaviours/Performance Indicators is full of ideas; finds different ways of doing things; answers questions fluently and readily; hypothesises easily; generally possesses high verbal fluency; can list, tell/retell, label & compile easily; answers (fluently) questions such as How many? Why? What are the possible reasons for? 2. Flexible Thinker can solve, change, adapt, modify, magnify, rearrange, reverse & improve; is versatile and can cope with several ideas at once; is constructive and mentally builds and rebuilds; is sensitive to new ideas and flexible in approach to problems; can tolerate ambiguity. 3. Original Thinker can create, invent, make up, construct, substitute, combine, compose, improve & design; is attracted by novelty, complexity, mystery; asks What if? questions. 4. Elaborative can enlarge, extend, exchange, replace & modify; goes beyond Thinker assigned tasks; sees new possibilities in the familiar; embellishes stories/situations. 5. Intrinsically often seeks out knowledge independently; does a job well for its Motivated own sake, not for rewards; appears to enjoy learning for learningʹs sake. 6. Curious / tries to discover the unusual or find out more about a topic of Immersed in topic interest; unable to rest until the work is complete; possesses a sense of wonder and intrigue; possesses a high energy level; is adventurous and engages in spontaneous action; can uncover, investigate, question, research, analyse, seek out & ponder. 7. Risk Taker will challenge, criticise, judge, question, dispute & decide; not afraid to try new things; not afraid to fail; can rank & give reasons, justify & defend, contrast & compare, devise a plan, make a choice between. 8. Imaginative / will fantasise, create, compose, invent, suppose, dramatise, Intuitive design, dream, wish; is perceptive and sees relationships; can make mental leaps from one idea to another and from the known to the unknown. 9. Engages in can evaluate, generalise, abstract, reflect upon, move from Complex Tasks / concrete to abstract, move from general to specific, converge & Enjoys a has problem tolerance; is not easily stressed; does not give up Challenge easily; often irritated by the routine and obvious. Innovation would be enhanced with more intellectual workers having these characteristics. The development of these characteristics needs to be embedded in our higher education programs as well as our researchers and innovators. Page | 10
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
If the nation is to enhance its innovation outputs and reputation it needs to develop the capacities of its existing intellectual workers and have a clear development path for its neophyte and emerging researchers and academics for these will be the creative intellectuals of the future. Alongside this, the nation has to develop a formal career path for its research workers. Currently there are limited career and employment options for our best and brightest full‐time researchers. In order to sustain a vibrant innovation sector the nation needs to invest in supporting Research Higher Degree Students. The government has already announced a policy direction to double the number of APA Scholarship and to open them to international students. Charles Sturt University is of the view that an alternative to doubling the number of students is to increase the amount of money allocated to each scholarship holder and increasing the number by only 25%. The level of the scholarships should be sufficient to attract high quality international applicants. There are some concerns that there may not be the demand from quality students to fill the doubled quota and consideration should also be given to phasing in the introduction of the increased numbers of APA Scholarships as demand warrants. An effective National Innovation System also requires strong leaders and leadership. An integrated national leadership development program for innovation needs to instigated and implemented. It should identify existing and emergent leaders and support them lead the nation’s innovation agenda. INFRASTRUCTURE AND INCENTIVES
Renewal of any system requires appropriate financing and resourcing. Given that the expected outcome of any review is change, two potential outcomes emerge: • Deploy the existing resource pool differently by supporting the same and/or new activities and schemes; or • add additional resources and support new activities and schemes. The major funding and resourcing issues to tackle from a University perspective are: • the funding that flows to universities through the Research Infrastructure Block Grants should be increased. Increased funding to this scheme would provide the capacity for ongoing revitalisation of research infrastructure needed to support research and innovation activity. • The Institutional Grant Scheme (IGS) has remained at a fixed level over the last five years. During that period, universities have increased their research performance but the percentage return from the IGS pool to research for individual universities Page | 11
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
has diminished. This reduction in funding has also compromised further research development and the associated capacity to innovate. •
•
Charles Sturt University acknowledges that the full cost recovery for its academic staff involved in research projects is not financially viable. However, universities should be viewed as the providers of research services rather funders of research through leveraging of University funds and in‐kind support of salaries. Economic incentives (such as payroll tax, stamp duty and R&D tax concessions) which encourage and reward industry for being engaged with and supporting the creation and application of new knowledge need to be reviewed and made more attractive. Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) have been resourced by Government in partnership with Industry, Research agencies, companies and universities to come together to address significant national problems and issues. They have served their purpose in many instances with demonstrable success evident for most, however, they can be bureaucratic to deal with and over protective of intellectual property as the pressure for commercial outcomes have risen. This pressure for accountable commercial outcomes has seen the reduction of the number of public good CRCs. This trend should be reversed if CRCs in their current form emerge from this review. In examining the framework for the future roll out of infrastructure and incentives, it is important that we do not become over‐reliant on virtual research networks or transient research engagement. While information and communication technologies play an essential role in capturing and distributing knowledge more effectively, and supporting interactions across geographically dispersed research networks, it is important to maintain and extend geographic linkages across the country to support research depth and innovation outputs. Page | 12
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
REFERENCES
Andersson, M. & Karlsson, C. (2004) Regional innovation systems in small and medium sized regions. CESIS Electronic Working Paper Series Paper No. 10. Downloaded from http://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/cesisp/0010.html. Charles Sturt University. (2007) Growing our Communities through Research and Education. Downloaded from http://news.csu.edu.au/uploads/documents/Charles%20Sturt%20University%20‐
%20Growing%20our%20Communities1.pdf
Mejia, L. (2001) Innovation – Observations from Stanford University. Address to the Inaugural Ericsson Innovation Awards, 27 February 2001 Morgan, K. (2004) The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. Journal of Economic Geography, Vol 4 No. 1 Mowrey, D., & Sampat, B. (2003) Universities in national innovation systems, Presentation to the Globlics Academy. Downloaded from http://www.globelicsacademy.net/pdf/DavidMowery_1.pdf
Proctor, R.M.J., & Burnett, P.C (2004). Measuring cognitive and dispositional characteristics of creativity in elementary students. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 421‐429. Western Research Institute. (2005) Economic Impact of Charles Sturt University. Downloaded from http://www.csu.edu.au/division/plandev/publications/docs/ecco_impact.pdf Page | 13
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
CAPABILITY STATEMENT
Charles Sturt University is committed to solving problems through practical, applied and strategic research. We understand that many of the challenges facing our communities, and our nation, require us to work across traditional disciplines to develop innovative solutions. That is why Charles Sturt University is committed to a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to research. The University strategically invests its resources in selected areas of proven and potential strength significant to the University’s mission. In line with this approach, the University supports a range of key research centres and groupings. To ensure our research is practical and informed, our research centres include participation from industry or international experts. The University’s current centres and research activities include: ARC Special Research Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics The Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics constitutes the largest concentration of philosophers working on applied philosophy and public ethics in Australia, and one of the largest such concentrations internationally. The largest centre of its kind in the world, the Centre is a national special research centre that brings together the strengths of Charles Sturt University, the University of Melbourne and the Australian National University. Research areas are criminal justice ethics, business and professional ethics, computer ethics and the ethics of nanotechnology, biotechnology, welfare and political violence. www.cappe.edu.au
ARC Special Research Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security The Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security aims to achieve excellence in policing and security research to drive local and global policy and practice reform strengthening the security and wellbeing of Australia. http://www.griffith.edu.au/arts‐languages‐criminology/centre‐excellence‐policing‐security
International Centre of Water for Food Security The Centre is an international centre for excellence in strategic research, smart technologies and applied training in integrated water resources management to secure and improve food production, environmental sustainability and communities’ well‐being through advanced research, enhanced technical and scientific cooperation, and knowledge transfer in related topics at both regional and international levels. The Centre is the Australasian host of the UNESCOʹs Hydrology for the Environment, Life and Policy (HELP) initiative under the International Hydrology Program (IHP) . http://www.icwater.org/
Page | 14
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
Institute for Land, Water and Society The Institute is an internationally recognised provider of integrated research that contributes to enhanced social and environmental sustainability in rural and regional areas. The Institute combines the expertise of over 100 environmental scientists, hydrologists, social researchers and economists, plus 80 PhD students to address critical sustainability issues in inland Australia. The five research themes are; Ecology and Biodiversity; Economics and Regional Development; Human Dimensions of Environmental Management; Rural and Social Research, Water Systems and an emerging theme of Arts Culture and Communications. www.csu.edu.au/research/ilws
EH Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation The Centre is developing innovations for profitable and sustainable agricultural systems through integrated and collaborative research, extension, education and training, and is speeding up the delivery of new information to land managers. The EH Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation has an international reputation as a centre of excellence for integrated agricultural research and extension in mixed farming systems. www.csu.edu.au/research/grahamcentre
National Wine and Grape Industry Centre The National Centre undertakes research which contributes to the sustainability of grape and wine production across NSW’s wine production areas and across Australia. The Centre is composed of teaching and research staff from the University, NSW Department of Primary Industries and NSW Wine Industry Association. Its key research themes represent the areas identified by the wine industry in its analysis of research and development needs. www.csu.edu.au/nwgic
Centre for Public and Contextual Theology This research group breaks new ground in the theological scene in Australia. Traditionally, theology has been undertaken within an ecclesiastical environment, which can narrow its scope and not account for wider contexts. The focus of this group is the concern for questions and issues relevant in contemporary society, placed within the Australian setting. Public theology needs be concerned with the engagement, via dialogue, of faith tradition with wider social and intellectual concerns of the day. Contextual theology in Australia must take account of our pluralist, multicultural society, in order to remain relevant to our diverse population, across the scope of our wide land. The context created by Aboriginal settlement, colonisation and progress to nationhood provides a perspective which influences the various strands of theology, to provide a unique resource for the tasks of theology today. www.csu.edu.au/faculty/arts/theology/pact
Research Institute for Professional Practice, Learning and Education The Centre focuses on understanding and developing professional practice in a range of professions including education, occupational therapy, speech pathology, nursing, accountancy, management and other professions. Researchers are working on problems including attracting and retaining professionals in rural and regional Australia and Page | 15
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
responding to increased diversity in the professions through initial and continuing education and research. www.csu.edu.au/research/ripple
Centre for Research in Complex Systems The Centre for Research in Complex Systems carries out world‐class research in complex systems theory and applications. The many projects in the group cover a range of themes in different ways, from fundamental analysis of cellular automata to virtual environments. http://silica.csu.edu.au/CRICS/
Spatial Data Analysis Network The primary role of the Spatial Data Analysis Network is to support research, education and consultancy across all faculties of the University by providing tools, training and expertise in the areas of geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing and spatial statistics. The Network aims to develop and promote the use of GIS and other spatial technologies, in facilitating and enhancing holistic research into a wide range of social, health, environmental, agricultural and other issues. www.csu.edu.au/research/span/
Centre for Inland Health The Centre for Inland Health co‐ordinates cooperative research and development programs designed to examine and address the priority health issues and concerns of inland Australian communities. The programs are conducted cooperatively by alliances of University teams and teams from external organisations, including health service providers. Collaborative research teams are currently working in the areas of: rural mental health; dentistry and oral health; heart and lung health and fitness; cancer; muscle, bone and joint health; vulnerable families; ageing; health services and workforce, and, health promotion. http://www.csu.edu.au/special/inland‐health/
Problem Focussed Research Groupings A Problem Focused Research Grouping is led by an established Research Leader, usually at the professorial level and is comprised of a discipline or trans‐disciplinary group of academic and general staff and research students. Each Group has identified a significant problem or issue on which to focus their research. The Problem Focused Research Groupings include: • Applied Social Cognition Research Group • Cardiovascular Research Group • Vocational Education and Training Research Group • Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care Group • Chemical Analysis for Metabolomics Research Group • Organisational Performance, Ethics and Leadership Research Group • Expanded Decision Making in Clinical Practice Research Group Cooperative Research Centres
Page | 16
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
Cooperative Research Centre for Future Farm Industries The Centre is a unique co‐investment between meat, grains and wool industry research corporations, the Landmark agribusiness company, and the combined research power of CSIRO, six state agencies and four universities, including Charles Sturt University. The aim of the CRC is to transform agricultural systems across southern Australia by developing Profitable Perennials™, and applying perennial plant technologies to innovative farming systems that increase productivity of existing livestock and grain industries, develop new regional industries through investment, reduce the risk of natural resource degradation, including dryland salinity, and improve conservation of biodiversity and water resources. www.futurefarmcrc.com.au/
Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures The Centre’s mission is to facilitate cooperative research and training networks and programs which continuously improve irrigation policy, tools, practices and processes to double irrigation water use efficiency, improve profitability for commercial irrigation, protect soil and water condition and the dependent ecosystems. Charles Sturt University is a program leader for the System Harmonisation and Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships. The System Harmonisation Program aims to develop strategies to improve cross‐organisational communication and system‐wide management while improving production and environmental outcomes. www.irrigationfutures.org.au
Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information The Centre works to develop the concept of a Virtual Australia, uniting research and commercial innovation in spatial information. The Centre will harness Australia’s recognised research and commercialisation strengths in spatial information technologies to create new opportunities and increased prosperity for all Australians. www.crcsi.com.au
Cooperative Research Centre for Plant Biosecurity The CRC Plant Biosecurity’s vision is to be a world leader in the generation, development and delivery of plant biosecurity science and education. The mission is to foster scientific collaboration and engage stakeholders to deliver plant biosecurity technologies that will reduce risk to, and ensure sustainability of, Australia ’s plant industries. http://www.crcplantbiosecurity.com.au/index.php
Cooperative Research Centre for Pork Charles Sturt University is a supporting participant in the Centre. The Centre aims to enhance the international competitiveness of the Australian pork industry by providing and adopting new and novel technologies that reduce feed costs, improve herd feed conversion efficiency and increase the range and functionality of pork products. The Centre is focussed on breakthroughs in pig and plant biology to advance knowledge and facilitate the development of technological innovations for the pork industry. http://porkcrc.com.au/html/about_us.html
Page | 17
Submission to the Review of the National Innovation System
Cooperative Research Centre for Cotton Catchment Communities The Centre undertakes collaborative research, education and commercialisation activities to provide innovative knowledge that is adopted for the benefit of the Australian cotton industry, regional communities and the nation. www.cotton.pi.csiro.au
Page | 18