Queensland Chief Scientist
annual report 2010
Queensland science: the tipping point
Professor Peter Andrews
Queensland Chief Scientist
The position of Queensland Chief Scientist provides high level, strategic advice to the Premier and Cabinet
on the role of science, research and innovation in achieving the State Government’s priorities. In doing so,
a primary focus of the role is to provide advice on maximising the return on the Government’s investment in
research and development (R&D).
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
2
Table of contents
Executive summary ................................................................................................... 5
1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 8
2.0 1998-2008: Smart State....................................................................................... 8
2.1 Queensland is doing things smarter…........................................................... 9
2.2 … in comparison to the rest of Australia ...................................................... 11
2.3 In summary .................................................................................................. 15
3.0 2008-2010: Tipping point .................................................................................. 16
3.1 The biotechnology story… ........................................................................... 17
3.2 …and its aftermath....................................................................................... 20
4.0 2010-2020: Tomorrow’s Queensland .............................................................. 21
4.1 Strong: using science to create a diverse economy powered
by bright ideas .................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Green: using science to protect our lifestyle and environment .................... 25
4.3 Smart: using science to deliver world-class education and training ............ 27
4.4 Healthy: using science to make Queenslanders Australia's
healthiest people ................................................................................................ 30
4.5 Fair: using science to support safe and caring communities ....................... 32
5.0 Recommendations ............................................................................................ 35
Annex ........................................................................................................................ 36
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
3
Figures
Figure 1. The state of Queensland science, 1998 and 2008 ............................... 9
Figure 2. Queensland’s research and development performance relative
to Australia, 1998 and 2008 ............................................................................... 12
Figure 3. (a) Change in BERD intensity and (b) growth in BERD
intensity, Queensland, Australia and OECD, 1998-99 to 2008-09 .................... 13
Figure 4. Biotechnology: from bricks to brains to business ............................... 17
Figure 5. Queensland high and medium-high technology manufacture
exports as a proportion of total goods exports, 1998-99 to 2008-09 ................. 23
Figure 6. Sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Australian
states, 2008 ....................................................................................................... 25
Figure 7. Queensland per capita greenhouse gas emissions,
1998 to 2008 ...................................................................................................... 26
Figure 8. Queensland STEM graduates as a proportion of all new
university graduates, 2000 to 2008 .................................................................... 28
Figure 9. Queensland annual recurrent health expenditure per capita
(constant prices), 1997-98 to 2007-08 ............................................................... 31
Figure 10. Proportion of Year 8 students at the low international
benchmark on TIMSS ........................................................................................ 33
Tables
Table 1. Research and development intensity of Queensland’s industries,
2008-09 .............................................................................................................. 21
Table 2. Percentage of Year 8 children achieving the advanced TIMSS
benchmark ......................................................................................................... 28
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
4
Executive summary
1. This annual report, the last from the present Queensland Chief Scientist, is
timely for three reasons:

research and industry data for the first decade of the Smart State Strategy,
1998-2008, are now largely available

the global financial crisis, while leaving Queensland largely unscathed, has
brought us to a tipping point with respect to our research and development
(R&D) investment

the Queensland Government has embarked on a hugely ambitious strategy to
make Tomorrow's Queensland strong, green, smart, healthy and fair.
2. How much did our performance improve over the course of the decade? And
how did we fare relative to the rest of Australia?
In the period since the inception of the Smart State Strategy, Queensland’s image,
particularly in national science and business sectors, has been transformed from that
of a rural economy built on rocks and crops to that of a rapidly growing, innovative
State with a clear commitment to research and innovation.
Relative to Australia as a whole, Queensland's research and development
performance is improving rapidly. Research and development outputs of our
universities and medical research institutes (MRIs) are tracking well, as are early
stage commercialisation outcomes. The relative increase in business expenditure on
research and development (BERD) has also been impressive, but we are not yet
nationally competitive in overall research and development intensity (gross
expenditure on research and development - GERD) or the translation of research and
development into later stage economic outcomes.
State government investment in research and development has had a profound
leveraging effect on the other elements of GERD. To grow BERD/GERD to nationally
competitive levels, we will need to maintain the momentum of government investment
in research and development, including focussed investment in the translation of
research and development into economic outcomes. Our ability to effect that
translation will, in turn, be critically dependent on the future availability of skilled
science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) professionals.
3. How effective was Queensland's investment in biotechnology? Should we
repeat it?
Between 2002 and 2008 the earnings of Queensland's biotechnology industry grew by
a factor of eight. This, as well as the four-fold growth in the number of industry
employees, exceeded the projections targeted in the 2005-2015 Strategic Plan for the
Queensland biotechnology industry.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
5
By any measure, the biotechnology story has been a resounding success. But it is still
a work in progress. To finish the job, we need to continue to invest in linkages
between researchers, investors and end-users (industry, health services, markets)
and in the training of the STEM teachers and researchers who will provide the skilled
workforce to drive the future growth of the industry.
More generally, the biotechnology story provides a crystal clear example of how
sustained research investment and commitment by government can change the
direction of a state, not just by diversification of the economy, but also socially and
environmentally.
4. What research and development is needed to achieve the Tomorrow's
Queensland ambitions? How do we drive it?
We are at a critical tipping point for Queensland. Will we return to the State of ‘she’ll
be right, mate’ or will we make the focussed research and development investments
required to achieve a strong, green, smart, healthy and fair Queensland?
Strong: The growth of knowledge-intensive industries in Queensland will depend
directly on our investment in research and development. The Queensland
Government has the opportunity to use the leveraging capacity of its research and
development investment to focus the State’s overall research and development effort
more effectively on building knowledge-intensive industries.
Green: Continued research and development is the key to dealing with Queensland's
environmental challenges. In particular, the demonstration and deployment of lowemission coal technologies and the creation of clean and renewable energy
generation industries will be critical to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Smart: Increasing the number of teachers with specialist STEM knowledge, and the
ability to convey this to the STEM researchers and workers of the future, is essential.
To achieve this we need to ensure that students entering teacher training are among
our best and brightest, and that their training includes in-depth discipline content,
quality pedagogy and a broad understanding of employment opportunities in STEM
disciplines.
Healthy: Queensland's investment in biomedical research over the past decade
provides us with a superb opportunity to build capacity in preventive medicine through
studies in health economics, research aimed at reduction in chronic disease risk
factors in children and teenagers, and the commercialisation of research on vaccines,
biomarkers and biotherapeutics.
Fair: We need to invest in research at the interface between the social, technological
and health sciences in order to harvest best practice and implement it in service
delivery by linking university research and development to government policy makers
and non-government organisation (NGO) service providers. An iconic institute for
social science research would give Queensland a leadership position in tackling the
invidious cycle of social disadvantage.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
6
5. What do we need to do?
Ongoing investment in research and development and its application will be essential
if Queensland is to achieve its goals of being strong, green, smart, healthy and fair.
Recommendation 1: Make balanced investments in research and development
infrastructure.
As demonstrated by the outcomes of the Queensland Government's investment in
biotechnology and biomedical sciences, bricks attract brains. Application of a similar
strategy in the social sciences will enable Queensland to take a leadership position in
addressing social disadvantage. A similar opportunity exists in applied mathematics,
which has the potential to transform many of Queensland's industries, as well as
addressing some of our most pressing social and environmental issues.
Recommendation 2: Make focussed investments in research and development
projects linking research to industry and other end-users.
Of equal importance is the linkage between brains and business. Focussed innovation
funds provide opportunities to build new industries based on research and
development, and to add value to old industries by using research and development to
enhance productivity and develop related service industries. Similar linkages are
necessary to ensure the application of research outputs to social and environmental
challenges.
Recommendation 3: Invest in building a high quality STEM teaching workforce
Achieving the ambitions of Tomorrow's Queensland will require a strong pool of
scientists and researchers, but the proportion of graduates in the STEM disciplines is
falling. While not yet a pressing issue, the supply of STEM practitioners will become
increasingly rate limiting with increased research and development investment,
particularly in the business sector. The key factor in rebuilding the STEM pipeline is
the quality of science and mathematics teachers in schools.
Bottom line
None of these recommendations will be easy to implement. They all require money,
and money is in short supply. But money spent on research and development and
education today will be the best investment government can make to ensure the
money supply of Tomorrow’s Queensland.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
7
1.0 Introduction
This is the final State of Science report from the present Queensland Chief Scientist,
Professor Peter Andrews.
It is timely for three reasons:
1.
Research and industry data for the first decade of the Smart State Strategy,
1998-2008, are now largely available. For the first time, we can answer the
questions: how much did our performance improve over the course of the
decade? And how did we fare relative to the rest of Australia?
2.
The global financial crisis, while leaving Queensland largely unscathed, has
brought us to a tipping point. Which way should we go? Can we afford (not) to
persevere with our investment in research and development and its
conversion to economic, social and environmental outcomes?
3.
The Queensland Government has embarked on a hugely ambitious strategy
to make Tomorrow's Queensland strong, green, smart, healthy and fair. We
need to know: what can science do to help deliver on these ambitions? And
how can we facilitate it?
This report, alongside the Queensland Government research and development
expenditure report 2009-10 and the R&D Queensland annual report 2010 , answers
these questions. Based on those answers, it recommends three essential investments
that will determine the success or otherwise of Tomorrow's Queensland.
2.0 1998-2008: Smart State
In 1998, the Queensland Government embarked on a strategy of innovation reform, to
build on Queensland’s resource-driven economy and to develop a more diverse,
knowledge-intensive and globally competitive state.
Through the Smart State Strategy, the Queensland Government has invested or
committed to invest $3.6 billion in building Queensland’s innovative capacity, including
research infrastructure and networks, fellowships, and projects translating research
findings into economic, environmental and community outcomes.
The following is an assessment of Queensland's progress in the decade since the
inception of the Smart State Strategy. In particular, it explores our progress with
respect to the key inputs (research and development investment, STEM skills) and
outcomes (knowledge, exports of knowledge-intensive goods and services)
characteristic of a knowledge-intensive economy.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
8
2.1 Queensland is doing things smarter ....
The key differences in the state of Queensland science between 1998 and 2008 are
illustrated in Figure 1. Note that these data are expressed in relative terms (e.g.
research and development expenditure as a percentage of GSP, scientific articles per
capita) rather than absolute numbers (e.g. research and development expenditure in
$'s, number of scientific articles). They therefore reflect the extent to which we are
doing things smarter rather than increases resulting from economic or population
growth.
OUTCOMES
INPUTS
GERD (% of GSP)
Knowledge-intensive goods
exports (% of goods exports)
Knowledge-intensive services
exports (% of services exports)
2.50
BERD (% of GSP)
2.00
GovERD (% of GSP)
1.50
Patents per capita**
1.00
HERD (% of GSP)
0.50
University/MRI start-up
companies per $100M R&D*
STEM graduates
(% of all graduates)
0.00
50%
Income from
University/MRI LOAs
(% R&D expenditure)*
100%
Scientists per 1,000 employed
150%
University/MRI invention
disclosures per $100M R&D*
Article citation index
(quality of articles)
Business funding of HERD
(% of HERD)
200%
250%
Private equity investments
(% of GDP)#
Scientific articles
per capita
Qld 2008
Qld 1998 (baseline)
^ Unless otherwise stated, values for 2008-09 were expressed as a percentage of values for 1998-99,
which were assigned a baseline of 100 per cent.
#
2008-09 relative to 1999-00; * 2006 relative to 2000; ** 2006-07 relative to 1998-99.
LOAs = licences, options and assignments.
Source: See Annex for indicator values, descriptions and sources.
Figure 1. The state of Queensland science, 1998 and 2008^
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
9
Investment in research and development

Gross expenditure on research and development (GERD) increased from 1.11
per cent to 1.59 per cent of Gross State Product (GSP).1 GERD is the primary
measure of investment in research and development, including expenditure
on research and development by businesses, state and federal governments,
universities and non-profit organisations such as medical research institutes
(MRIs).

Business expenditure on research and development (BERD)2 more than
doubled from 0.41 per cent to 0.95 per cent of GSP. Private equity
investments have also more than doubled as a percentage of GSP, but
GovERD (government expenditure on in-house research and development)
intensity decreased.3
Strength of science base

The number of scientists working in Queensland increased from 8,500 to
18,100 between 1997-98 and 2008-09. There have also been substantial
increases in the quality and quantity of scientific articles, and increases in
business funding of university research and development. Higher education
expenditure on research and development (HERD) has also doubled in real
terms.

Despite a significant increase in the proportion of scientists in Queensland's
workforce, the percentage of graduates with STEM degrees continues to fall. 4
From bricks to brains: build it and they will come
The Queensland Brain Institute’s world-class facilities helped attract some of the
world’s top neuroscientists to Queensland, with more than 70 per cent of the research
group leaders new to Queensland and 25 per cent new to Australia.5 The $63 million
state-of-the-art building has also acted as a powerful magnet to draw many
outstanding young Australian scientists back from overseas positions.
1 R&D expenditure as a percentage of GSP is also referred to as R&D intensity.
2 BERD refers to business expenditure on in-house R&D. Investments by businesses in R&D undertaken by
universities, for example, are captured under higher education R&D (HERD). Similarly, GovERD refers to
R&D undertaken in-house by the Australian and state governments.
3 According to Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) data, the decrease in GovERD intensity is due to a
decrease in state government in-house R&D as a proportion of GSP. This is inconsistent with data collected
directly from government departments by the Office of the Queensland Chief Scientist and published in the
Queensland Government R&D Expenditure Report 2009-10
4 Given that Australia has a reasonably high number of researchers (8.5 researchers per 1,000 total
employment, compared with the OECD average of 7.4 per 1,000), this may not appear to be of immediate
concern. However, the number of researchers conducting R&D in the business sector in Australia, at 2.4 per
1,000 employed, is half the OECD average (4.8), and a third of that in Korea (7.1). As BERD rises, the
short-fall in STEM graduates will be the major brake on Queensland's knowledge-intensive economy.
Sources: ABS (2010) Research and Experimental Development, All Sector Summary, Australia, 2008-09
(Catalogue No 8112.0), Canberra; OECD.Stat, Main Science and Technology Indicators Database,
accessed 29 October 2010.
5 Figures provided by the Queensland Brain Institute.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
10
Economic outcomes

Economic returns from these activities have been mixed, with a significant
increase in the proportion of exports due to knowledge-intensive services
being partly offset by a reduction in the proportion of exports due to
knowledge-intensive goods. This is likely to be due in part to the time lag
between increases in research and development investments and
downstream outcomes. However, the decrease in the proportion of exports
due to knowledge-intensive goods suggests that there is a need to focus more
closely on the linkages between research and industry.
Tropical opportunities: ripe for the picking
The global tropical economy is projected to reach US$40 trillion – twenty times
Australia's projected economy – in 2025.6 As one of the few developed tropical
regions with a strong base in tropical expertise, Queensland has an immense
opportunity to tap into the rapidly growing markets of our developing tropical
neighbours.
Established in 2009 with support from the Queensland Government, TropLinks is a
non-profit organisation that aims to develop a globally competitive tropical economy by
establishing Queensland and Australia as a world leader in tropical science,
knowledge and innovation. In 2009-10, over 200 researchers, companies, investors
and entrepreneurs joined the TropLinks network, whose brokering activities now
encompass seven nations, including Papua New Guinea, Guam, the Solomon Islands
and the Philippines.
Bottom line
The key indicator of an innovative economy, GERD, is progressing well, driven by
substantial increases in BERD. The shortfall in STEM graduates, while not yet rate
limiting, will become so as BERD continues to grow. Ongoing government investment
in the linkages between research and industry will be vital to build economic outcomes
from our expanding research base.
2.2 ... in comparison to the rest of Australia
In 1998, when the Queensland Government embarked on the Smart State Strategy,
Queensland’s research and development and innovation record was poor by both
Australian and international standards. Since then, growth in Queensland’s research
and development performance has exceeded that of Australia as a whole for most
indicators. These data, summarised in Figure 2, are once again expressed in per
capita or per cent of GSP terms, thus eliminating the contribution of economic growth
and increased population to Queensland’s performance.
6 Based on an estimated gross tropical world product (GTWP) of $12 trillion (calculated from the World
Factbook, Central Intelligence Agency, www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/, accessed April 2005), and
growth in GTWP and Queensland GSP over 20 years of 6% p.a. and 4.2% p.a., respectively.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
11
Qld relative to Aust 1998
Qld relative to Aust 2008
Australia
(100%)
200%
300%
Inputs:
GovERD (% of GDP)
BERD (% of GDP)
Private equity
investments (% of GDP)#
Business funding of HERD
(% of HERD)
QLD
<
AUST
HERD (% of GDP)
STEM graduates
(% of all graduates)
Outputs:
Scientists per
1,000 employed
Scientific articles per capita
Article citation index
(quality of articles)
QLD

AUST
Early stage outcomes:
Patents per capita^^
University/MRI invention
disclosures per $100M R&D*
Income from University/MRI LOAs
(% R&D expenditure)*
University/MRI capital raised for research
commercialisation (% R&D expenditure)**
QLD
>
AUST
University/MRI commercialisation equity
holdings (% R&D expenditure)*
University/MRI start-up companies
formed per $100M R&D*
Late stage outcomes:
Knowledge-intensive goods exports
(% of goods exports)
Knowledge-intensive services exports
(% of services exports)
QLD
<<
AUST
^ Unless otherwise stated, values for Queensland in 1998-99 and 2008-09 were expressed as a
percentage of values for Australia in 1998-99 and 2008-09, respectively. Bars should be read
relative to Australia (red line). Differences between blue and green bars represent changes in
Queensland’s performance relative to Australia between 1998 and 2008, which may differ from
changes in Queensland’s performance generally, depicted in Figure 1.
#
1999-00 and 2008-09; * 2000 and 2006; ** 2004 and 2006; ^^ 1998-99 and 2006-07.
Source: See Annex for indicator values, descriptions and sources.
Figure 2. Queensland’s research and development performance relative to Australia,
1998 and 2008^
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
12
Inputs

Between 1998 and 2008, Queensland's BERD intensity grew significantly
more (133 per cent) than that of Australia (105 per cent) or the OECD (12 per
cent).7 Nevertheless, because we started from a much lower base, our 2008
BERD intensity still lagged behind both Australia and the OECD (Figure 3).
Smoke and mirrors
One view of the BERD data, illustrated in Figure 3a, suggests that Queensland
is simply following Australia towards the OECD average BERD figure, without
any discernible gain.
The alternative view, illustrated in Figure 3b, demonstrates that Queensland's
BERD intensity has grown significantly more rapidly than that of Australia over
the course of the past decade.
140%
1.6%
OECD
1.4%
AUST
1.2%
1.0%
QLD
0.8%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
Growth in BERD intensity (%)
BERD intensity (% of GDP)
1.8%
QLD
120%
100%
AUST
80%
60%
40%
20%
OECD
0%
-20%
0.0%
(b)
(a)
Source: ABS (2010) Research and Experimental Development, Businesses, Australia, 2008-09
(Catalogue No 8104.0), Canberra; ABS (2009) Australian National Accounts: State Accounts,
2008-09 (Catalogue No 5220.0), Canberra; OECD.Stat, Main Science and Technology Indicators
Database, accessed 29 October 2010.
Figure 3. (a) Change in BERD intensity and (b) growth in BERD intensity,
Queensland, Australia and OECD, 1998-99 to 2008-09

Business funding of HERD, which was already higher in Queensland
compared with the rest of Australia in 1998, has increased to 6.6 per cent of
total HERD funding, whereas for Australia overall it has decreased to 4.9 per
cent.

Private equity investment as a proportion of Queensland’s GSP has increased
from 57 per cent to 84 per cent of the Australian figure.

Despite increasing by 43 per cent over the decade, GERD intensity has
increased at a slower rate than for Australia overall.
7 OECD data from OECD.Stat, Main Science and Technology Indicators Database, accessed 29 October
2010.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
13
Outputs

The number of scientists per thousand employees has increased more rapidly
in Queensland (14 per cent) than in Australia overall (12 per cent).

The per capita output and impact (citation index) of scientific articles have
both moved from below the Australian average to above the Australian
average.
Building competitive edge: Queensland ecoscience
Queensland has become a hub of tropical ecoscience research. Of the 100 most cited
ecoscientists in the world, seven come from Australia. Three are from The University
of Queensland and two from James Cook University. 8

Consistent with this, Queensland’s universities have become more successful
in securing competitive Commonwealth funding (National Health and Medical
Research Council and Australian Research Council grants) in recent years,
with total funding increasing at a rate 1.4 times that of the rest of Australia. 9

In contrast to these increases in research and development employment,
funding and publications, the proportion of university graduates in STEM
disciplines, which was well above the Australian average in 1998, has fallen
20 per cent to just below the Australian average.
Early stage outcomes

The commercialisation performance of Queensland’s universities and medical
research institutes has increased at a rate greater than the rest of Australia,
with income from licences, options and assignments (LOAs) and the value of
research commercialisation equity holdings both increasing from below to
above the Australian average.
8 Ecologists and environmental scientists were ranked by the total number of citations in the past ten years;
Possingham, H. (9 August 2010) Capacity, opportunity and impediments. Speech presented at the R&D
Queensland Forum on Ecosystems, Brisbane.
9 Compound annual growth rate 2002-2010 based on the total value of new grants awarded (including out
years) by grant commencement year. Includes grants in the ARC National Competitive Grants Program
Dataset (completed and new and ongoing projects), www.arc.gov.au/general/searchable_data.htm, and the
NHMRC Research Funding Dataset 2001-2010, www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/dataset/rmis/index.htm.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
14
Worth every penny: the benefits of investment
The value of government investment in research and development is demonstrated by
recent figures from Queensland’s research organisations. Every dollar invested by the
Queensland Government in The University of Queensland’s Institute for Molecular
Bioscience (IMB) has reaped a return of $4.50 - $6.50.10 And Queensland’s
universities and medical research institutes contributed an estimated $3.5 billion to the
economy in 2007 through sales of licensed technologies, accounting for over half of
the national figure.11
Later stage outcomes

Exports of knowledge-intensive goods and services have also grown more
rapidly than the Australian average, but both measures remain low in absolute
terms.
Bottom line
Queensland's overall research and development performance is improving rapidly
relative to Australia as a whole. research and development outputs from universities
and medical research institutes are tracking well, as are early stage commercialisation
outcomes. The relative increase in BERD has also been impressive, but we are not
yet nationally competitive in overall research and development intensity (GERD) or the
translation of research and development into later stage economic outcomes.
2.3 In summary
Because research and development is a long-term investment, the impact of Smart
State investments committed since 2006 (including approximately 70 per cent of the
Innovation and Smart Futures Funds) 12 will not yet be evident in the preceding data.
Nevertheless, in the period since the implementation of the Smart State Strategy,
Queensland’s image, particularly in national science and business sectors, has been
transformed from that of a rural economy built on rocks and crops to that of a rapidly
growing, innovative state with a clear commitment to research and innovation.
10 Mather, J. (2010) State investment a smart strategy, study shows. The Australian Financial Review, 20
September, p 29.
11 Based on data tables from: Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Australian
Government (2009) National Survey of Research Commercialisation 2005-2007, Canberra. See:
www.innovation.gov.au/Section/Innovation/Pages/TheNationalSurveyofResearchCommercialisation.aspx.
12 Deloitte (2010) Return on DEEDI’s Smart State innovation investment. Brisbane, Department of
Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, Queensland Government.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
15
The future economic returns from this transformation will be driven primarily by further
increases in BERD and GERD. However, as demonstrated by the data in the
Queensland Government research and development expenditure report 2009-10,
State Government investment in research and development has had, and will continue
to have, a profound leveraging effect on the other elements of GERD.
Leveraged investment: Callide Oxyfuel Project
The $200 million Callide Oxyfuel Project, scheduled to open in 2011, will be the
world’s first retrofitted power station using ‘bolt-on’ technology to capture around
20,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions over a nominal two to three year period.13
The demonstration project was established with the help of a $10 million commitment
from the Queensland Government, $25 million from CS Energy, $50 million from the
Commonwealth Government and a further $106 million from the Australian Coal
Association, Japanese Government, and an international consortium of industry
partners, including Xstrata Coal, IHI Corporation, J-POWER, Mitsui and
Schlumberger.14
To grow BERD/GERD to nationally competitive levels, we will need to maintain the
momentum of government investment in research and development, including
focussed investment in translation of research and development into economic
outcomes. Our ability to effect that translation will, in turn, be critically dependent on
the future availability of skilled STEM professionals.
3.0 2008-2010: Tipping point
In the wake of the global financial crisis, the wisdom of Queensland's commitment to
long-term strategic investments, such as the Smart State Strategy, has been
questioned. In particular, doubts have been expressed with respect to present and
possible future returns on the State's investment in biotechnology.
Here are the facts.
13 Callide Oxyfuel Project website, www.callideoxyfuel.com/, accessed 9 November 2010; Department of
Employment, Economic Development and Innovation website,
www.energyfutures.qld.gov.au/callide_oxyfuel.cfm, accessed 9 November 2010.
14 Information provided by Dr Chris Spero, CS Energy.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
16
3.1 The biotechnology story…
From bricks ...
Vision attracted capital: the initial investment of $15 million by the Queensland
Government in the Institute for Molecular Bioscience at The University of Queensland
leveraged a further $90 million from other sources, including $65 million from the
Commonwealth Government and $10 million from Atlantic Philanthropies.
Over the next ten years, further commitments of $1.2 billion by the Queensland
Government in research and development infrastructure, research and industry
collaborations, skills development and commercialisation capability leveraged a further
$3.1 billion from these and other sources. 15
In October 2010, Premier Anna Bligh initiated the construction of the Translational
Research Institute, turning the first sod for a $354 million collaborative venture that will
house 700 researchers in cross-disciplinary teams dedicated to translating
Queensland's research findings into new drugs and vaccines.
Attract the best
researchers
Translate R&D into
products & services
Business
Brains
Bricks
Build quality
research
Invest in R&D
Figure 4. Biotechnology: from bricks to brains to business
...to brains...
Capital attracted researchers: between 1998 and 2008 the number of scientists in
Queensland increased by 113 per cent, from 8,500 to 18,100. Many of these scientists
came to biotech, where the total number of employees increased from around 1,000 to
3,760 between 2002 and 2009.16
15 Based on total commitments from the Innovation Funds and Smart Futures Funds by the Department of
Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 1998-2010.
16 Full-time equivalents; based on data in: Department of State Development, Trade and Innovation (2005),
Biotechnology – Setting New Horizons, Queensland Biotechnology Strategic Plan 2005-2010, Brisbane;
Silvey, P. and Proctor, L. (2010) Queensland Life Science Industry Report 2010. Brisbane, Department of
Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
17
More broadly, the emerging life sciences sector employed almost 20,000 people, of
whom more than two-thirds were employed by industry. Their average salary was 25
per cent more than the overall average for employees in Queensland's industries. 17
... to business...
Researchers attracted industry: between 2002 and 2009 the earnings of
Queensland's biotechnology industry grew by a factor of eight. This, and the four-fold
growth in the number of industry employees, exceeded the projections targeted in the
Queensland Biotechnology Strategic Plan 2005-2015.18
Connecting across the globe: Queensland Washington Alliance Group
The Queensland Washington Alliance Group (QWAG) was established in 2006 to
connect researchers in Queensland and Washington State and drive innovation and
economic growth for both regions through joint scientific, commercial, and educational
endeavours.
Queensland researchers are now leading programs worth over $45 million, funded by
the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, in the areas of population health, dengue fever
and banana biofortification.19
And the outcomes didn't stop there. Whereas in 1998 there were no drugs developed
by the Queensland biotechnology industry in clinical trials, by 2008 more than 20
drugs were in clinical development.20
This capacity for drug discovery and development by research institutes and
biotechnology companies is leading the pharmaceutical industry towards a new
paradigm, where early stage research is largely outsourced, and the majority of new
drugs are biologicals rather than chemicals.
Both trends are evident in recent, and very important, investments by industry in
Queensland. The first is the investment by Health Care Ventures in collaboration with
Eli Lilly and the Queensland Government in a new $250 million early-stage investment
fund to drive the development of new discoveries from universities and research
institutes. The second is the partnership with DSM Biologics in Biopharmaceuticals
Australia, the country's first scaled-up production facility for biological therapeutics and
vaccines.
17 Silvey, P. and Proctor, L. (2010) Queensland Life Science Industry Report 2010. Brisbane, Department
of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation; 2009 estimates.
18 Based on data in: Department of State Development, Trade and Innovation (2005), Biotechnology –
Setting New Horizons, Queensland Biotechnology Strategic Plan 2005-2010, Brisbane; Silvey, P. and
Proctor, L. (2010) Queensland Life Science Industry Report 2010. Brisbane, Department of Employment,
Economic Development and Innovation.
19 Information provided by the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.
20 Silvey, P. and Proctor, L. (2010) Queensland Life Science Industry Report 2010. Brisbane, Department
of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
18
Gardasil: half a success story
Gardasil, the vaccine invented by Professor Ian Frazer and the late Dr Jian Zhou to
prevent cervical cancer, epitomises the opportunities for commercialising the
innovative ideas emerging from Queensland's investment in biotechnology.
To date, over 6 million vaccinations have been administered in Australia with total
vaccinations worldwide exceeding 61 million.21 Arguably one of Australia’s most
important scientific discoveries, the vaccine was first patented by UniQuest, but further
development was undertaken overseas because of Australia's lack of capacity to
clinically trial and commercialise the discovery – ultimately resulting in a loss of
income for Queensland from the $5 billion in worldwide sales to date.22
Fortunately, the establishment in Brisbane of the Translational Research Institute
(TRI), including Biopharmaceuticals Australia, will make this issue a thing of the past.
TRI will be the only space in Australia where new biopharmaceuticals and treatments
can be discovered, developed, clinically tested and manufactured in one location,
ensuring that the rewards of Queensland discoveries can be reaped by the State.
... and beyond
The importance of these investments to the development of knowledge-intensive
industries in Queensland is further demonstrated by the latest figures available for
Australia's export industries, which reveal that the pharmaceutical industry is now the
largest high-technology export sector in Australia, with exports exceeding those of the
heavily protected automotive industry.23
Based on our investments to date, the next significant development in the biotech
industry for Queensland could very well be a drug manufacturing industry servicing
Asia, where our brand is already strong. Could this be, as suggested by The
Australian Financial Review, the antidote to Australia’s chronic trade deficit in
manufactured goods, which in 2009-10 stands at $97 billion, all but negating the
benefits of our $137 billion of mineral and energy exports? 24 Or will it simply be a
source of well-paid jobs for Queenslanders when the resources boom slows?
But the rewards of the government’s investment in biotech go beyond the
pharmaceutical industry. There is a broader opportunity to build on Queensland’s
success in biotech to fuel Queensland’s emerging industrial and animal biotech
industry. Investments by the likes of biotech giant Pfizer Animal Health to acquire
21 Website of the Department of Health and Ageing, Therapeutic Goods Administration, Australian
Government, www.tga.gov.au/alerts/medicines/gardasil.htm, accessed 9 November 2010.
22 Premier and Minister for the Arts, Queensland Government (2010) For the first time the battle against the
world’s worst diseases can be fought in Australia, media release, 19 October.
23 ABS, Foreign Trade, unpublished data; provided by the Office of Economic and Statistical Research,
Queensland Treasury.
24 Roberts, P. (2010) Drug industry needs a tonic. The Australian Financial Review, 10 September, p 56.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
19
Queensland-based Catapult Genetics25 and the role of global biotech leader,
Syngenta in the Mackay Renewable Biocommodities Pilot Plant26 have the potential to
build new industrial sectors, diversifying and strengthening the Queensland economy.
Emerging biotech industries: Mackay Renewable Biocommodities Pilot Plant
Queensland University of Technology’s $10 million Mackay Renewable
Biocommodities Pilot Plant was established in 2010 with $3.1 million Queensland
Government funding, and $5.2 million in Federal Government funding including $3.4
million under the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy and $1.8
million under the Super Science Initiative. Industry partners include global
agribusiness company Syngenta, Farmacule and Mackay Sugar. 27
Positioning Queensland to take a lead role in the lucrative bioproducts industry, the
pilot plant has the potential to reduce commercialisation costs for new technologies by
over $10 million and the commercialisation timeframe by five years.28
3.2 …and its aftermath
By any measure, the biotechnology story has been a resounding success. But it is still
a work in progress. To finish the job, we need to continue to invest in linkages
between researchers, investors and end-users (industry, health services, markets)
and in the training of the STEM teachers and researchers who will provide the skilled
workforce to drive the future growth of the industry.
More generally, the biotechnology story provides a crystal clear example of how
sustained research investment and commitment by government can change the
direction of a state, not just by diversification of the economy, but also socially and
environmentally.
25 Catapult Genetics website, www.catapultgenetics.com/, accessed 16 November 2010.
26 Syngenta Australia website,
www.syngenta.com.au/start.aspx?UCCurrent=/News/UCNewsCorporateArchive.ascx&PageId=1015&MenuI
d=15&News=CorporateArchive&NewsId=301, accessed 16 November 2010.
27 Premier and Minister for the Arts, Queensland Government (2010) New Mackay plant to lead the
Australian charge into biofuels, media release, 9 July.
28 Put some sugar in your tank. Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE)
Focus, Number 163, August 10, p. 38.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
20
4.0 2010-2020: Tomorrow’s Queensland
In September 2008, the Queensland Government embarked on a hugely ambitious
program to make Queensland stronger, greener, smarter, healthier and fairer by 2020.
Achieving these ambitions will require commitment not only from government, but also
industry and the community. It will also be very much dependent on the quality of our
research.
4.1 Strong: using science to create a diverse economy powered by bright ideas
Knowledge-intensive industries are the drivers of modern economies, and the major
part of the knowledge that underpins them is generated from research and
development. The research and development intensity of industries is thus a key
factor in economic growth.
Research and development-intensive industries can be new industries (built on
research and development in any area) or extensions of existing industries (based on
research and development undertaken to improve their productivity). For example, of
the major industries that undertake research and development in Queensland (Table
1), the two most research and development intensive are the professional, scientific
and technical services industry and the mining industry.
Table 1. Research and development intensity of Queensland’s industries, 2008-09^
Queensland
Industry
Mining
Professional, scientific and technical
services
Manufacturing
Construction
Wholesale trade
Financial and insurance services
Electricity, gas, water and waste services
Transport, postal and warehousing
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Information media and
telecommunications
Australia
23,083
R&D
intensity:
BERD as
% GVA
2.78%
R&D
intensity:
BERD as
% GVA
4.74%
510
11,225
4.54%
3.57%
475
354
66
62
62
46
30
18,971
18,627
10,883
15,552
4,629
16,388
4,924
2.51%
1.90%
0.61%
0.40%
1.34%
0.28%
0.60%
3.98%
1.03%
1.48%
1.64%
1.18%
0.35%
0.50%
26
5,359
0.49%
2.12%
Qld
Qld BERD
($M)
GVA ($M)
643
^ Includes industries with research and development expenditure over $20 million in 2008-09; values have
been rounded; GVA = Gross Value Added.
Source: ABS (2010) Research and Experiment Development, Businesses, Australia, 2008-09 (Catalogue
No 8104.0), Canberra; ABS (2009) Australian National Accounts: State Accounts, 2008-09 (Catalogue No
5220.0), Canberra.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
21
The first of these is a developing services industry, in which research and
development is the driver making a smart industry bigger. The second is a traditional
industry where research and development is being employed extremely effectively to
make a big industry smarter.
Smart industries: mining services and technology in Queensland
With over 300 companies, institutions and other organisations, the mining technology
services and equipment (MTSE) sector is positioning Queensland at the forefront of a
knowledge-intensive economy.
Driven by investments in research and development infrastructure and facilities at the
Queensland Centre for Advanced Technologies (QCAT), the Cooperative Research
Centre for Mining, the Process Engineering and Light Metals Centre at Central
Queensland University, The University of Queensland's Sustainable Minerals Institute,
and the Minerals Characterisation Research Facility at the Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral
Research Centre, Queensland’s MTSE sector generated an estimated $2.8 billion in
revenue in 2008-09, and accounted for over 40 per cent of the nation’s MTSE export
sales.29
In other industries, such as ICT and financial and insurance services, the research
and development intensity of Queensland's industries is less than 25 per cent of the
Australian figure, and our economic share of these industries is correspondingly small.
Tipping point
A key measure of the knowledge intensity of an economy is the level of high and
medium-high technology manufacture exports as a percentage of total goods exports.
For Queensland, this figure is currently just under 5 per cent, compared to 12 per cent
for Australia, 13 per cent for Norway, 62 per cent for the USA and 73 per cent for
Korea (Figure 5).
29 Tedesco, L. and Haseltine, C. (2010) An economic survey of companies in the Australian mining
technology services and equipment sector, 2006-07 to 2008-09 (ABARE-BRS research report 10.07).
Canberra, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics – Bureau of Rural Sciences. The
MTSE sector includes, “establishments that supply goods and services that embody specialist technology,
innovation, intellectual property or knowledge specific to the minerals industry. This technology is defined to
include the introduction or implementation of a new or significantly improved good, service or operational
process.”
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
22
High/medium-high tech manufactures
(% of total goods exports)
Korea (73%)
70%
USA (62%)
60%
50%
40%
30%
Tomorrow's Qld?
20%
Tipping Point
10%
Norway (13%)
Qld : business as usual
0%
^ International data refer to 2008.
Source: ABS, Foreign Trade, unpublished data; OECD Stan Indicators Database
www.oecd.org/sti/stan/indicators, accessed 29 October 2010.
Figure 5. Queensland high and medium-high technology manufacture exports as a
proportion of total goods exports, 1998-99 to 2008-09^
We are at a critical tipping point for Queensland. Will the proportion of Queensland's
exports derived from knowledge-intensive manufactured goods remain among the
lowest in the world, with inevitable impacts on our ability to ride the ebb and flow of our
resources industries, or will we make the focussed investments in research and
development required to build new knowledge-intensive industries?
Where next?
The growth of knowledge-intensive industries in Queensland will depend directly on
our investment in research and development. Whilst GERD in Queensland is low by
OECD standards, it is nevertheless very significant ($3.9 billion per annum).30 The
Queensland Government, which contributes 10 per cent of the State's research and
development budget,31 has the opportunity to use the leveraging capacity of its
research and development investment to focus the State’s overall research and
development effort more effectively on building knowledge-intensive industries.
30 GERD of 1.59% of GSP ($3.9 billion) for Queensland in 2008-09 versus an OECD average in 2008 of
2.33% of GDP; ABS (2010) Research and Experimental Development, All Sector Summary, Australia,
2008-09 (Catalogue No 8112.0), Canberra; OECD.Stat, Mains Science and Technology Indicators
Database, accessed 29 October 2010.
31 Based on an investment of $384 million in 2008-09 by the Queensland Government (see Queensland
Government R&D Expenditure Report 2009-10) and a GERD of $3.9 billion.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
23
The impact of such a focussed research and development investment would be to
achieve a more sustainable balance between the State’s primary, secondary and
tertiary industries. In particular, it would make:

our smart industries bigger by leveraging investment in new technologies, e.g.
biotech and cleantech

our big industries smarter by helping them to create research and
development-based goods and services e.g. agriculture and transport.
From bright ideas to business outcomes: Australian Institute for
Commercialisation
Established in 2002 as part of the Smart State Strategy, the independent and not-forprofit Australian Institute for Commercialisation (AIC) provides innovation and
collaboration services to convert research and innovative ideas into commercial
success.
Over the past five years, the TechFast and Ideas2Market programs delivered by the
AIC have contributed an estimated $29-59 million to Queensland’s annual economic
output, and $88-221 million to Australia’s economy, a return of between $11.40 and
$32.50 for every $1 invested in these programs.32
Of equal importance is the opportunity to build smarter industries based on investment
in enabling sciences and technologies. For example, the financial services and
insurance industry is heavily dependent on the quantitative skills of applied
mathematics and statistics, but Australia's stock of applied mathematicians is
dwindling fast. An iconic investment in the area of applied mathematics would give
Queensland a position of national leadership in industries such as finance and
insurance and transport and logistics, while also attracting and training the applied
mathematicians required to address some of our most pressing social and
environmental needs.
32 AECgroup (2010) Economic Impact Assessment: AIC Innovation and Collaboration Programs, Final
Report, November 2010. Brisbane, Australian Institute for Commercialisation.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
24
4.2 Green: using science to protect our lifestyle and environment
The preservation of Queensland’s environment is fundamental to our way of life and
cultural heritage, but population and economic growth are putting increasing pressure
on Queensland’s unique ecosystems. Our challenge is to ensure a sustainable
balance between these social and economic demands and the needs of the
environment.
The key factor is energy.
On the one hand energy, and particularly coal, is a vital part of our economy. On the
other hand, energy consumption drives 60 per cent of Queensland's GHG emissions
(Figure 6), which are among the highest in the world.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (CO2-e, Gg)
180
160
Land Use, Land Use
Change, Forestry
140
Other
120
Waste
100
80
Agriculture
60
Industrial Processes
40
20
Energy
0
-20
NSW QLD
VIC
WA
SA
NT
TAS
ACT
Source: Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (AGEIS), Department of Climate
Change and Energy Efficiency, Australian Government,
http://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/SGGI.aspx#.
Figure 6. Sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Australian states, 2008
Tipping point
Over the past five years Queensland's per capita GHG emissions have plateaued,
perhaps even begun to decline, but they remain approximately one-third higher than
those of the United States and more than 2.5 times those of Korea and Norway
(Figure 7).
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
25
Per capita GHG emissions (CO 2 -e, tonnes)
35
Tipping Point
30
25
Qld : business as usual
USA (22.7 t)
20
Tomorrow's Qld?
15
10
Korea (11.6 t) /
Norway (11.3 t)
5
0
^ Excludes land use, land use change and forestry component of emissions. International data refer
to 2008 per capita GHG emissions in the case of the USA and Norway, and 2001 emissions in the
case of Korea.
Source: Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (AGEIS), Department of Climate
Change and Energy Efficiency, Australian Government,
http://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/SGGI.aspx#; ABS (2010) Australian Demographic Statistics, Mar
2010 (Catalogue No 3101.0), Canberra; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) Data Interface, http://unfccc.int/di/DetailedByParty.do, accessed 29 October 2010;
OECD.Stat, Economic Indicators for Main Science and Technology Indicators Database, accessed
29 October 2010.
Figure 7. Queensland per capita greenhouse gas emissions, 1998 to 2008^
We are at a critical tipping point for Queensland. Will Queensland's GHG emissions
remain among the highest in the world, with potentially devastating impacts on many
of our unique flora and fauna, or will we make the focussed investments in clean and
renewable energy research and energy efficiency technologies needed to reduce our
GHG emissions?
Where next?
Continued research and development is the key to dealing with these challenges. In
particular, the demonstration and deployment of low emission coal technologies and
the creation of clean and renewable energy generation industries will be critical to
reducing GHG emissions. These outcomes will not be achieved by individual
companies, governments, universities or research organisations. They require a
shared vision and coordinated effort.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
26
Clean energy: Sustainable Aviation Fuel Initiative
The Sustainable Aviation Fuel Initiative, led by Professor Lars Nielsen of The
University of Queensland’s Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology
(AIBN), is an aviation biofuel research consortium consisting of Queensland and
international research and industry partners.
The Initiative, which is focussed on the production of synthetic paraffinic kerosenes
(bio-SPK or bio-jet-fuel) from sugarcane, oilseed trees and algae, has matched
Queensland Government funding with industry investment from Boeing, Virgin Blue
and US energy company, Amyris.33
4.3 Smart: using science to deliver world-class education and training
The 2006 International Survey of Adult Literacy and Life Skills measured the
proportion of the populations of various countries who were ready and able to
participate in a knowledge-intensive economy.
In Australia, 46 per cent of the population did not possess sufficient prose literacy to
function in a knowledge-intensive economy, 53 per cent did not possess sufficient
numeracy to do so, and 70 per cent did not possess sufficient problem solving skills.34
So much for adults. What about our children?
Table 2 shows data from the latest Trends in International Mathematics and Science
Study (TIMSS), conducted in 2007. When it comes to producing the smart scientists
and mathematicians of the future, Australia, like the United States, lags far behind the
developing economies of Singapore and Korea. Queensland, in turn, ranks fourth of
the eight Australian states and territories.35
33 Premier and Minister for the Arts, Queensland Government (2010) The green future of the sky – planes
powered by algae, media release, 4 May.
34 ABS (2008) Adult Literary and Life Skills Survey, Summary Results, Australia, 2006 (Catalogue No
4228.0), Canberra.
35 Thomson, S., Wernet, N., Underwood, C. and Nicholas, M. (2008) TIMSS 07: Taking a closer look at
mathematics and science in Australia. Melbourne, Australian Council for Educational Research.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
27
Table 2. Percentage of Year 8 children achieving the advanced TIMSS benchmark
Country
Science
Mathematics
Singapore
32%
40%
Republic of Korea
17%
40%
United States of America
10%
6%
Australia
8%
6%
Norway
2%
0%
Source: Thomson, S., Wernet, N., Underwood, C. and Nicholas, M. (2008) TIMSS 07: Taking a closer
look at mathematics and science in Australia. Melbourne, Australian Council for Educational Research.
Other international studies reflect similar differences in mathematical and scientific
literacy, interest in science, and the proportion of students undertaking STEM studies
in the final years of school or at university. As is evident in Figure 8, the proportion of
STEM graduates in Queensland has been falling steadily for the past ten years.
STEM graduates as % of university graduates
40%
35%
Korea (32.8%)
30%
Tomorrow's Qld?
25%
Tipping Point
20%
15%
Norway (15.4%)
USA (14.9%)
10%
Qld : business as usual
5%
0%
^ For all university award completions; data include the fields of Natural and Physical Sciences,
Information Technology, Engineering and Related Technologies, and Architecture and Building,
but not Health or Agriculture, Environmental and Related Studies, in line with the OECD definition
of Science and Engineering graduates. International data refer to 2008.
Source: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), Australian
Government, Higher Education Statistics Collection,
www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Publications/HEStatistics/Publications/Pages/Home.aspx;
OECD.Stat, Education and Training Database, accessed 29 October 2010.
Figure 8. Queensland STEM graduates as a proportion of all new university graduates,
2000 to 2008^
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
28
Tipping point
The USA, acknowledging that science and technology has propelled most of the
increase in USA per capita income in the past century,36 has recently recognised that
its poor performance in STEM education is of vital concern. The administration has
responded decisively, even in the face of a difficult fiscal situation, by allocating $4.4
billion to educational reform, focussed on improving teacher quality.
Queensland is at an equally critical tipping point. Will the proportion of students
studying STEM disciplines at school and university continue to fall, with inevitable
consequences for the diversification of our economy and the achievement of our
social and environmental goals, or will we make the investments in teacher quality and
training necessary to reverse the decline?
Where next?
The major factor influencing the proportion of STEM graduates is quality of schooling.
Teachers with specialist content and pedagogical knowledge in their disciplines have
the capacity to inspire students to do well and continue in their studies.
Skills for our future: Queensland Academies
Developed as part of the Smart State program, the $21 million Queensland Academy
for Science, Mathematics and Technology (QASMT) and the $28 million Queensland
Academy for Health Sciences (QAHS) enable students with an aptitude for science,
maths, technology or research to prepare for careers within these disciplines.37
Featuring state-of-the-art research and science teaching facilities, the Academies offer
important partnerships with The University of Queensland (QASMT) and Griffith
University (QAHS). Of those completing Year 12 at QAHS in 2009, almost 94 per cent
continued to university (nine receiving scholarships) with 12 students fast tracked into
second year university health courses. 38
Unfortunately, not all students can attend the Academies, and not all teachers have
the necessary knowledge and skills to inspire them: an estimated 40 per cent of
Queensland’s public secondary schools have mathematics programs being taught by
teachers who are not fully qualified in the curriculum or teaching area. The situation is
similar for the sciences, with more than 30 per cent of schools having programs taught
by teachers who are not fully qualified. 39
36 Lander, E. S. and Gates Jr, S. J. (2010) Prepare and Inspire. Science, Vol 330 (6001):151.
37 See: www.qldacademies.eq.edu.au/index.html.
38 Queensland Academy for Health Sciences, 2009 School Annual Report; 2010 Next Step Survey:
http://qahs.eq.edu.au/index.php/annual-report/.
39 Australian Education Union (2009) State of Our Schools Survey 2009; 1,473 public school principals
responded to the nation-wide survey, 18% and 6.9% of whom were from secondary or combined
primary/secondary schools, respectively.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
29
Increasing the number of teachers with specialist STEM knowledge, and the ability to
convey this to the STEM researchers and workers of the future, is essential. To
achieve this we need to ensure that students entering teacher training are among our
best and brightest, and that their training includes in-depth discipline content, quality
pedagogy and a broad understanding of the employment opportunities in STEM
disciplines.
4.4 Healthy: using science to make Queenslanders Australia's healthiest
people
Over the course of the 20th century the life span of Australians has increased by 20
years,40 but this has been at a huge cost. Eighty per cent of aged Australians – those
in the process of living that extra 20 years – suffer from chronic disease, and 70 per
cent of the total health costs of this country are now due to largely preventable chronic
disease.41
The proportion of Queensland adults with significant risk factors for chronic disease
include: heavy drinkers (12 per cent of females and 11.5 per cent of males), daily
smokers (14 per cent of females and 17.4 per cent of males), overweight and obese
people (48 per cent of females and 63 per cent of males).42
The lifestyles that these numbers reflect are in large part responsible for the escalating
costs of chronic disease.
Tipping point
Driven in part by population growth, Queensland's recurrent health expenditure is
growing at the fastest rate of all Australian states: 6 per cent between 1997-98 and
2007-08, versus 5.1 per cent for Australia overall (Figure 9).43
40 ABS (2004) Measures of Australia’s Progress 2004 (Catalogue No 1370.0), Canberra.
41 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2006) Chronic diseases and associated risk factors in
Australia, 2006, Canberra.
42 Pollard G., White D. and Harper C. (2009) Self-Reported Health Status: Queensland 2009 Survey
Report. Brisbane, Queensland Health.
43 Equal highest rate with Western Australia; Australian Institute for Health and Welfare (2009) Health
expenditure Australia 2007-08 (Health and Welfare Expenditure Series No 37), Canberra.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
30
Recurrent health expenditure
(A$ per person)
USA (A$10,352)
10,000
Qld : business as usual
8,000
Norway (A$6,763)
6,000
Tipping Point
Tomorrow's Qld?
4,000
2,000
Korea (A$2,397)
0
^ Values in 2007-08 prices. International comparisons refer to total health expenditure per capita,
including capital expenditure, 2007.
Source: Australian Institute for Health and Welfare (2009) Health expenditure Australia 2007-08
(Health and Welfare Expenditure Series No 37), Canberra.
Figure 9. Queensland annual recurrent health expenditure per capita (constant prices),
1997-98 to 2007-08^
We are at a critical tipping point for Queensland. Will we allow recurrent health
expenditure to continue to rise towards the level of Norway or even the USA, with
inevitable consequences for the quality of all of our lives, or will we make the
investments in the prevention or early detection and treatment of disease necessary to
reverse escalating health costs?
Where next?
An investment of $1 per annum in preventive medicine has been shown to yield
returns of roughly $5.60 per annum within five years of the original investment.44
More specifically, a recent report found that if the investment in Australian health and
medical research by government and the business community was maintained
according to historical levels over the next 15 years, then revenues of $73.7 billion
could be generated along with $150 billion in savings due to health benefits. 45
Queensland's investment in biomedical research over the past decade provides us
with a superb opportunity to build capacity in preventive medicine at three levels
through:
44 Levi, J., Segal, L. M. and Juliano, C. (2009) Prevention for a Healthier America; Investments in Disease
Prevention Yield Significant Savings, Stronger Communities. Washington DC, Trust for America’s Health.
45 Lateral Economics (2010) The Economic Value of Australia’s Investment in Health and Medical
Research: Reinforcing the Evidence for Exceptional Returns. Melbourne, Research Australia.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
31

studies in health economics, understanding where we can intervene in the
prevention or early detection of chronic disease to make the biggest economic
impact

further research at the interface of behaviour/education/health aimed at
reduction in chronic disease risk factors in children and teenagers

commercialisation of research on vaccines to prevent disease, biomarkers
and other diagnostics capable of revealing early indications of disease, and
biotherapeutics that can be used for its early treatment.
Exporting smart health solutions: Triple P-Positive Parenting Program
Developed by the Parenting and Family Support Centre at The University of
Queensland, the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program is an evidence-based parenting
and family support strategy used throughout the world to prevent behavioural,
emotional and developmental problems in children.
With over 142 evaluation studies involving 43 institutions, 16 countries and 227
researchers, the program has built a global network of research collaborations,
including in public health areas such as the parenting of obese children and children
with chronic illnesses.
To date, the program has been adapted for use in 20 countries around the globe and
has helped six million children and their families.46
4.5 Fair: using science to support safe and caring communities
Queensland’s Indigenous population experiences social disadvantage on multiple
levels including shorter life-spans, lower educational attainment and lesser
employment outcomes. But social disadvantage is by no means restricted to the
Indigenous population.
Consider two Brisbane suburbs, about 10 km apart, both with very small Indigenous
populations. In Suburb A, 70 per cent of the population has at least Year 12 education.
In Suburb B, 60 per cent of the population have Year 10 education or less, and just 30
per cent have completed Year 12.
Family incomes in Suburb A average three times those of Suburb B; unemployment in
Suburb B is 11 times Suburb A; crime rates, chronic disease indicators, teenage
maternity and hospitalisations from mental illness are all substantial factors in Suburb
B, but barely show up in Suburb A. From poor education and teenage maternity to
unemployment and chronic disease, the cycle of disadvantage continues over
generations of welfare dependency.47
46 Information sourced from Prof Matt Sanders and the Triple P Positive Parenting Program website,
www.triplep.net/cicms/assets/pdfs/pg1as100gr5so197.pdf, www17.triplep.net/?pid=58, accessed 9
November 2010.
47 Based on analysis of Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) 2006 data for Brisbane suburbs by the
Department of Communities, Queensland Government.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
32
Tipping point
Proportion of Yr 8 students at low benchmark
At the heart of this cycle of social disadvantage is the level of educational
achievement. Poor education leads to poorer outcomes. Internationally, there is a
direct correlation between achievement levels in the Programme for International
Student Assessment (PISA) and socio-economic levels.48 Yet the proportion of
Queensland children with the lowest attainment levels in international surveys such as
TIMSS is rising (Figure 10).
40%
Qld : business as usual
Norway (37%)
35%
Tipping Point
30%
25%
USA (25%)
20%
15%
10%
Tomorrow's Qld?
Korea (8%)
5%
0%
^1999 and 2003 data refer to Australia; 2007 value is common to Australia and Queensland;
International data refer to 2007 results.
Source: Thomson, S., Wernet, N., Underwood, C. & Nicholas, M. (2008) TIMSS 07: Taking a
closer look at mathematics and science in Australia. Melbourne, Australian Council for Educational
Research.
Figure 10. Proportion of Year 8 students at the low international benchmark on TIMSS^
We are at a critical tipping point for Queensland. Will the socially disadvantaged
proportion of our society continue to experience the consequences of poorer
educational outcomes, with ensuing costs to society, or will we make the investments
in research at the interface of the social, technological and health sciences required to
disrupt the cycle of social disadvantage?
Where next?
The key element in breaking the cycle of social disadvantage is education but it, in
turn, depends heavily on a number of other social factors.
48 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Database: PISA2003, Country Profile for
Australia, Relationship between student performance and socio-economic background, Mathematics,
http://pisacountry.acer.edu.au/index.php.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
33
Change for the better: the story of Cherbourg Primary School
The transformation that was undertaken by Chris Sarra as Principal for Cherbourg
Primary School from 1998 to 2005 through the adoption of a ‘Strong and Smart’
philosophy has provided a model for revolutionising Indigenous and socially
disadvantaged education.
Chris focused on broad attitudinal change to address endemic problems such as high
absenteeism and low academic achievement by creating a shared vision for the
school in collaboration with community stakeholders and introducing practical
measures for specific issues. As a result, regular attendance grew from 50 per cent to
95 per cent between 1997 and 2002. Academic performance also improved, with the
proportion of Year 2 students requiring additional assistance in literacy or numeracy
decreasing from 93 per cent to 43 per cent and 80 per cent to 46 per cent,
respectively.49
We need to invest in research at the interface between the social, technological and
health sciences in order to harvest best practice and implement it in service delivery,
to link university research and development to government policy makers and NGO
service providers, and to build skills/capability.
However, as noted in the Queensland Government expenditure report 2009-10,
research and development in the social sciences, including both community wellbeing
and education and training, attracts relatively small amounts of research and
development funding.
A proposal for the Queensland Government to invest in a virtual social science
innovation centre is potentially extremely important. Using this investment as a starting
point, leveraged funds from Commonwealth and philanthropic sources could be used
to construct a physical institute that would act as a beacon for social science
researchers around the globe, and give Queensland a leadership position in tackling
the invidious cycle of social disadvantage.
49 Based on the Education Queensland Review of Cherbourg State School May 2002. What Works. The
Work Program: www.whatworks.edu.au/3_3_14.htm#outcomes.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
34
5.0 Recommendations
Ongoing investment in research and development and its application will be essential
if Queensland is to achieve its goals of being strong, green, smart, healthy and fair.
Recommendation 1: Make balanced investments in research and development
infrastructure.
As demonstrated by the outcomes of the Queensland Government's investment in
biotechnology and biomedical sciences, bricks attract brains. Application of a similar
strategy in the social sciences will enable Queensland to take a leadership position in
addressing social disadvantage. A similar opportunity exists in applied mathematics,
which has the potential to transform many of Queensland's industries, as well as
addressing some of our most pressing social and environmental issues.
Recommendation 2: Make focussed investments in research and development
projects linking research to industry and other end-users.
Of equal importance is the linkage between brains and business. Focussed innovation
funds provide opportunities to build new industries based on research and
development, and to add value to old industries by using research and development to
enhance productivity and develop related service industries. Similar linkages are
necessary to ensure the application of research outputs to social and environmental
challenges.
Recommendation 3: Invest in building a high quality STEM teaching workforce
Achieving the ambitions of Tomorrow's Queensland will require a strong pool of
scientists and researchers, but the proportion of graduates in the STEM disciplines is
falling. While not yet a pressing issue, the supply of STEM practitioners will become
increasingly rate limiting with increased research and development investment,
particularly in the business sector. The key factor in rebuilding the STEM pipeline is
the quality of science and mathematics teachers in schools.
Bottom line
None of these recommendations will be easy to implement. They all require money,
and money is in short supply. But money spent on research and development and
education today will be the best investment government can make to ensure the
money supply of Tomorrow’s Queensland.
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
35
ANNEX
Research and development performance indicators for
Queensland and Australia, 1998 and 2008
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
36
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
1998-09 (1998)
2008-09 (2008)
Indicator
2008-09 relative
to 1998-09
1998
2008
QLD
AUST
QLD
AUST
QLD
AUST
QLD/
AUST
QLD/
AUST
GERD (% of GDP)
1.11%
1.43%
1.59%
2.21%
1.43
1.54
0.77
0.72
BERD (% of GDP)
0.41%
0.66%
0.95%
1.34%
2.32
2.04
0.62
0.71
GovERD (% of GDP)
0.32%
0.33%
0.20%
0.27%
0.62
0.82
0.98
0.74
HERD (% of GDP)
0.37%
0.41%
0.44%
0.53%
1.18
1.29
0.91
0.83
STEM degrees (% of degrees awarded)
23.1%
21.5%
18.55%
19.10%
0.80
0.89
1.07
0.97
7.03
7.34
8.04
8.24
1.14
1.12
0.96
0.98
5.71%
5.31%
6.60%
4.95%
1.16
0.93
1.07
1.33
0.19%
0.33%
0.43%
0.52%
2.31
1.57
0.57
0.84
Scientific articles per capita
883
974
1407
1402
1.59
1.44
0.91
1.00
Article citation index (quality of articles)
1.63
1.74
2.8
2.68
1.72
1.54
0.94
1.05
30.50
15.79
24.46
16.15
0.80
1.02
1.93
1.51
1.81
2.86
2.30
1.54
1.27
0.54
0.63
1.49
University/MRI capital raised for research commercialisation (% R&D expenditure)**
5.96
3.42
4.17
1.47
0.70
0.43
1.74
2.84
University/MRI research commercialisation equity holdings (% R&D expenditure)*
2.59
2.90
5.11
2.48
1.97
0.86
0.89
2.06
University/MRI start-up companies per $100M R&D expenditure*
0.82
1.14
0.74
0.56
0.90
0.49
0.73
1.32
461.69
465.42
473.43
518.48
1.03
1.11
0.99
0.91
18.23%
39.05%
38.83%
57.56%
2.13
1.47
0.47
0.67
5.43%
18.07%
4.49%
10.95%
0.83
0.61
0.30
0.41
Scientists per 1,000 employed
Business funding of HERD (% of HERD)
Private equity investments (% of GDP)
#
University/Medical Research Institute (MRI) invention disclosures per $100M R&D
expenditure*
Income from University/MRI Licences, Options and Assignments (LOAs) (% R&D
expenditure)*
Patents per capita^
Knowledge-intensive services exports (% of services exports)
Knowledge-intensive goods exports (% of goods exports)
#
1999-00 and 2008-09 (rather than 1998-09 and 2008-09); * 2000 and 2006; ** 2004 and 2006; ^ 1998-99 and 2006-07
37
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
Indicator
Description
Source
GERD (% of GDP)
Gross expenditure on R&D by all sectors as a proportion of Gross State Product (GSP) or Gross Domestic Product
(GDP).
ABS Catalogue No 8112.0, 2008-09;
ABS Catalogue No 5220.0, 2008-09
BERD (% of GDP)
Business expenditure on R&D as a proportion of GSP or GDP; refers to in-house R&D only; excludes expenditure by the
business sector on R&D performed by other sectors; includes funds provided by other sources for in-house R&D.
ABS Catalogue No 8104.0, 2008-09;
ABS Catalogue No 5220.0, 2008-09
GovERD (% of GDP)
Government (including state and federal governments) expenditure on R&D as a proportion of GSP or GDP; refers to inhouse R&D only; excludes government expenditure on R&D performed by other sectors; includes funds provided by
other sources for in-house R&D.
ABS Catalogue No 8109.0, 2008-09;
ABS Catalogue No 5220.0, 2008-09
HERD (% of GDP)
Higher expenditure on R&D as a proportion of GSP or GDP; refers to in-house R&D only; excludes expenditure by the
higher education sector on R&D performed by other sectors; includes funds provided by other sources for in-house R&D.
ABS Catalogue No 8111.0, 2008;
ABS Catalogue No 5220.0, 2008-09
STEM graduates
(% of all graduates)
University award completions in the fields of Natural & Physical Sciences, Information Technology, Engineering &
Related Technologies, and Architecture & Building, as a proportion of all new university award completions. STEM
graduates do not include graduates in the areas of Health or Agriculture, Environmental & Related Studies, in line with
the OECD definition of Science and Engineering graduates.
Higher Education Statistics Collection,
Department of Employment, Education and
Workplace Relations, Australian Government
Scientists per 1,000 employed
Scientists have been defined under ANZSCO 2006 as 234 - Natural & Physical Science Professionals, including
Agricultural & Forestry Scientists (2341), Chemists & Food and Wine Scientists (2342), Environmental Scientists (2343),
Geologists & Geophysicists (2344), Life Scientists (2345), Medical Laboratory Scientists (2346), Veterinarians (2347),
and Other Natural & Physical Science Professionals (2349); based on total persons employed aged 15 years and over.
ABS Catalogue No 6291.0.55.001, Sept 2010;
ABS Catalogue No 6291.0.55.003, May 2009
(analysis of scientists numbers was provided by
Queensland Treasury)
Business funding of HERD
(% of HERD)
Proportion of total HERD sourced from the business sector.
ABS Catalogue No 8111.0, 2008
Private equity investments
(% of GDP)
Private equity investments – including venture capital and later stage private equity – are high risk capital invested in
businesses with prospects of rapid growth or high rates of returns. Data refer to private equity investment in investee
companies by location of investee company head office as a proportion of GSP or GDP.
ABS Catalogue No 5678.0, 2008-09;
ABS Catalogue No 5220.0, 2008-09
Scientific articles per capita
The number of scientific articles is a primary indicator of the productivity of university and MRI R&D (although articles are
also published by other sectors). Data refer to the total number of peer-reviewed articles (only) in the Thomson Reuters
Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index databases with a publication year (PY) of 1998 or 2008 and
with 'Qld' or 'Queensland' in the address, or 'Aust' or 'Australia' in the address, for Queensland and Australia,
respectively.
Thomson and Reuters Science Citation Index
and Social Science Citation Index, accessed 23
October 2010;
ABS Catalogue No 3101.0, March 2010
Article citation index
(quality of articles)
Citation index refers to the number of times a scientific article is cited by other publications, and reflects the impact of an
article. The average citation index of articles is an indicator primarily of the quality of university and MRI R&D. To allow
the comparison of the citation index of articles published in 1998 with those published in 2008, the number of citations in
the year of publication and the year following the year of publication for the articles from the above Thomson Reuters
database searches were used (e.g. for 1998 article citation index values, the total number of citations in 1998 and 1999
for articles published in 1998 was divided by the total number of articles published in 1998 for each of Queensland and
Australia).
Thomson and Reuters Science Citation Index
and Social Science Citation Index, accessed 23
October 2010
38
Queensland Chief Scientist
Annual report 2010
Indicator
Description
Source
University/Medical Research
Institute (MRI) invention disclosures
per $100M R&D expenditure^^
An invention disclosure is when a novel device, material or method resulting from R&D is made known to research
management of an organisation, usually the first step before securing intellectual property (IP) rights. Invention
disclosures are one of several measures of the intellectual property activity of universities and MRIs.
Income from University/MRI
Licences, Options and Assignments
(LOAs) (% R&D expenditure)^^
Licences, options and assignments (LOAs) are formalised IP agreements between two parties. The value of university
and MRI LOAs reflects the value of IP generated through R&D.
National Surveys of Research
Commercialisation, full data set, Department of
Innovation, Industry, Science and Research,
Australian Government;
ABS Catalogue No 8109.0, 2008-0;9
ABS Catalogue No 8111.0, 2008.
As above
University/MRI capital raised for
research commercialisation
(% R&D expenditure)^^
Capital raising for R&D commercialisation includes venture capital investment, UniSeed funding and funds raised through
public offerings. It is one of several measures of the potential business value of IP generated from R&D.
As above
University/MRI research
commercialisation equity holdings
(% R&D expenditure)^^
Research commercialisation equity holdings refer to the value of equity held by universities and MRIs in start-up
companies. It is one of several measures of the potential business value of IP generated from R&D.
As above
University/MRI start-up companies
per $100M R&D expenditure^^
The formation of start-up companies is one outlet of R&D commercialisation for universities and MRIs. The number of
start-up companies formed in a year is one of several measures of the potential business value of IP generated from
R&D.
As above
Patents per capita
A patent is a right granted for a novel device, substance or method, giving the owner exclusive right to commercially
exploit the invention. Patents, here, refer to patent filings (including innovation patents) at the Patent Office of IP
Australia, based on the state of the first listed applicant. It includes patents filed by all sectors performing R&D.
IP Australia datasets, accessed 1 December
2008;
ABS Catalogue No 3101.0, March 2010
Knowledge-intensive
services exports
(% of services exports)
Knowledge-intensive services exports as a proportion of all services exports is one measure of the knowledge intensity of
an economy. Knowledge-intensive services include: Education-related Services; Construction; Insurance & Pension
Services; Financial Services; Charges for the Use of Intellectual Property; Telecommunication, Computer & Information
Services; Other Business Services; Personal, Cultural & Recreation Services; and Government Goods & Services.
ABS Catalogue No 5368.055.003
(analysis of knowledge-intensive services
provided by Queensland Treasury)
Knowledge-intensive
goods exports
(% of goods exports)
Exports of high and medium-high technology manufactures (referred to here as knowledge-intensive goods) as a
proportion of total goods exports is a measure of the knowledge intensity of an economy. Knowledge-intensive goods
include ANZSIC 1993 codes: 2212, 2531-2535, 2541-2547, 2549, 2769, 2811-2813, 2819, 2823, 2824, 2829, 2831,
2832, 2839, 2841, 2842, 2849, 2851-2854, 2859, 2861-2867 and 2869.
ABS Foreign Trade, unpublished data
(analysis of knowledge-intensive goods
provided by Queensland Treasury)
^^ Based on analyses of the National Surveys of Research Commercialisation full data set (www.innovation.gov.au/Section/Innovation/Pages/TheNationalSurveyofResearchCommercialisation.aspx): All
organisations, other than Australian Government organisations, were included in calculations. For R&D expenditure, ABS data for the higher education sector and non-profit sector were added together, as R&D
expenditure data in the survey were incomplete. LOA income was not adjusted for portions paid to other institutions or commercial entities.
39