 |
| CSIRO boss Larry Marshall. Photo: Daniel Munoz |
The chief executive of the CSIRO is paid to think about the future. Being the head of Australia's premier scientific research body demands thinking deeply about causes and consequences. It requires that you have a fair idea of what might be coming down the pipe, and what to do about it. To be taken by surprise is not a good look.
We can't know, but it doesn't appear that Larry Marshall, the physics-trained, former SIlicon Valley entrepreneur who came back from 25 years in the United States to lead the CSIRO in 2014, paid much regard to the consequences when he set in motion swingeing job cuts of 350 positions over two years, mainly in the Ocean and Atmosphere, and Land and Water units.
The cuts revealed two weeks ago include axing 100 full-time positions out of the 140 scientists in CSIRO's climate monitoring and modelling units. These are dedicated to research in areas such as greenhouse gas levels, sea level rise, ocean temperatures, ocean acidification and stemming global warming.
So, to consequences. Australia's reputation in science has already taken a big hit. The decision has "alarmed the global research community" said 2900 scientists from nearly 60 countries in a letter to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. It showed "a misunderstanding of the importance of the depth and significance of Australian contributions to global and regional climate research", they warned.
Howard Barnsey said: "Losing our ability to participate in large-scale ocean science and observation will ultimately erode Australia's ability to shape the future and influence regional affairs", he said. As Australia's former Special Envoy on Climate Change, and ex-head of the Australian Greenhouse Office, he should know.
Others warned Australia risks being isolated from the community of nations and researchers devoting serious attention to climate change. We will lose the reciprocal access we now enjoy to research done elsewhere, such as in the Pacific, in return for our longstanding expertise in the Southern Ocean and Antarctica.
The federal government is encouraging youth to study STEM subjects – science, technology, engineering and mathematics – because we don't have enough qualified people to pursue the innovative future the Prime Minister envisages for the nation. The signal from the CSIRO cuts is that studying STEM is a gamble. Dozens of science PhD candidates or post-doctoral fellows who are being supervised by or working with CSIRO scientists will have their research disrupted. A brain drain to overseas is predicted.
The Herald acknowledges that to keep pace in a rapidly changing world, organisations must continually adapt and change, reprioritise and refresh. In current management-speak, you need to be "nimble" and "agile" to stay in the game. Dr Marshall is right to say that resting on laurels is a fast path to mediocrity.
Dr Marshall has indicated he wants to focus on new areas of growth especially those with high prospects for commercialisation such as titanium ink for 3D printing, clean coal and new food strains. But he has, as yet, provided no plausible answer to the question posed by the president of the Australian Academy of Sciences Dr Andrew Holmes: "Why would you want to throw away something that we're good at and that's useful?"
The decision smacks of having been hastily conceived and poorly executed. It is not clear that the CSIRO board even met to discuss it. There appears to be no coherent plan for which jobs will go and why those, nor for the new hires in growth areas which are supposed to claw back the job losses over two years.
Dr Marshall was poorly advised to justify the climate job cuts by saying the question of climate change "has been answered", and it's time to move on to how to mitigate it.
Maintaining climate modelling and monitoring capability as we learn how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and identify climate risks has never been more important. For now, the nation's scientists are scrambling to find homes for crucial research programs and science personnel in other institutions.
Here's a better idea. Dr Marshall should put the cuts on hold. There should be an independent review of what jobs are needed where, taking account of not just his organisation's but the nation's best interests. It may take a little longer, but the precautionary principle requires it. We have much invested, and much to lose. We don't want to be in the position of not knowing what we've got until it's gone.
Link
No comments :
Post a Comment