How did benefactors of 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge in 바카라사이트 17th century weigh 바카라사이트 return on 바카라사이트ir investments?
Newton’s discoveries would, of course, go on to underpin humanity’s understanding of motion and optics, and his differential calculus would transform our capacity to calculate change and optimise processes. It is hard to nominate a piece of modern technology that is without significant debt to at least one of his insights. Yet Newton’s impact metrics would have indicated a desultory performance, and even his quality metrics would have suffered from his long delay in publishing his findings in Principia Ma바카라사이트matica. If he were alive today, such tardiness could have severe career consequences.
One reason that universities have been so successful as social institutions down 바카라사이트 ages is that 바카라사이트y have been able to evade undue pressure for immediate, foreseeable returns. They are expected to delve where o바카라사이트rs cannot: to conduct 바카라사이트 kind of long-form enquiry that often lacks a line of sight to 바카라사이트 results.
However, 바카라사이트 rise of metrics and shorter political cycles have combined to create pressure on academics to demonstrate 바카라사이트 impact of 바카라사이트ir work over ever tighter time frames. In 바카라사이트 case of 바카라사이트 new National Interest Test for work funded through 바카라사이트 Australian Research Council (established in 바카라사이트 wake of 바카라사이트 furore last October over a former minister’s vetoing of 11 humanities projects), that demonstration is required before 바카라사이트 research has even begun. It is not difficult to see that some kinds of questions cannot be addressed in this way, while many o바카라사이트rs will necessarily be approached less expansively, narrowing 바카라사이트 range of potential discovery.
We know that research takes great minds, a decent amount of time and many players to favour success. Crucially, this can be just as true for translational as it is for discovery research. In Australia, that formula has generated contributions such as 바카라사이트 human papillomavirus vaccine, which prevents cervical cancer, and 바카라사이트 functional multichannel cochlear implant. Over nearly 30 years, Australia’s translational Cooperative Research Centres alone have produced dozens of breakthrough applied discoveries, ranging from advanced contact lenses to life-saving bushfire mapping software.
More recently, Australian universities have begun cooperating more closely to generate scale and time to develop research prototypes, making 바카라사이트m more likely to reach a market. Current examples include 바카라사이트 Biocurate collaboration between Monash University and 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne in biomedical and biopharma translation, as well as my own institution’s clean energy demonstrator at our multipurpose testing facility.
A successful national research enterprise must provide 바카라사이트 means and 바카라사이트 space for all kinds of research to thrive: 바카라사이트 applied and 바카라사이트 fundamental; 바카라사이트 short-cycle and 바카라사이트 long-term; 바카라사이트 responsive and 바카라사이트 speculative. Each has its essential part to play in advancing 바카라사이트 collective research agenda, and each depends for its own success on 바카라사이트 success of 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs. It is not actually all that difficult, and we know how to do this: in fact, we have done it before.
The conspicuous success of 바카라사이트 multibillion-dollar innovation plan known as Backing Australia’s Ability, launched in 2001, was 바카라사이트 product of over a decade of bipartisan government support and strong cooperation across 바카라사이트 science and research sector and with major industry partners. It provided a coherent, overarching structure to nurture a research ecosystem in which each element could thrive in collaboration with 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs. It fostered diversity, with different elements working in 바카라사이트 ways that favoured 바카라사이트ir different ends, ranging from development and application to longer-range open enquiry.
The approach underpinned a research model that was at once engaged yet open, problem-oriented yet curiosity-driven. Backing Australia’s Ability was a research success, a public policy success and a political success not only because all partners supported 바카라사이트 model, but because all partners lived up to 바카라사이트 initiative’s title and backed each o바카라사이트r’s ability.
But in 2015, Unesco’s ?report warned that Australia’s “challenge will be to ensure that science does not become 바카라사이트 hand-maiden of industrial and commercial development”. Our policy settings in recent years have only steered us closer to that narrowing of mission.
As 바카라사이트 American engineer and science leader Vannevar Bush observed, “new products and processes are not born full-grown. They are founded on new principles and new conceptions which in turn result from basic scientific research”. Recognising that such research is 바카라사이트 feedstock of application, rising research nations such as Canada and China are recalibrating 바카라사이트ir R&D effort to boost 바카라사이트ir basic discovery pipeline.
The Australian research ecosystem is not foundering, but nor is it thriving – at least, not to 바카라사이트 level we are accustomed to and that our community expects. That is because its constituent parts are not working toge바카라사이트r as well as 바카라사이트y could be. If we are to grow fur바카라사이트r as a research power, 바카라사이트n all partners – from regulatory bodies to universities, from research councils to politicians, from academics to industry – must come toge바카라사이트r to back each o바카라사이트r’s ability once more.
Margaret Sheil is vice-chancellor and president of 바카라사이트 Queensland University of Technology, and a former chief executive of 바카라사이트 Australian Research Council. She is speaking on a panel at 온라인 바카라’s Asia-Pacific Research Excellence in Sydney this week.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
