A chat with Australia’s chief scientist

Last week I visited the Australian Embassy in Washington, DC, to have a chat with Ian Chubb , Australia’s chief scientist. He was in town to promote Australian science and to meet science policy makers. He’d just arrived from London; his next stop was Ottawa.

Chubb is a neuroscientist, whose research focuses on the biochemistry of signal transmission. Before he took up his position, he served as the vice chancellor—that is, the chief executive officer—of the Australian National University in Canberra.

Our hour-long conversation ranged over several topics, including climate change, education, and Australia’s bid with New Zealand to host what will become the world’s biggest, most sensitive telescope, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA). I was aware of Australia’s strengths in astronomy, medicine, and other fields of science. But after listening to Chubb, I came away with the impression that Australia has another, less well-known strength: science policy.

In its population (22.7 million) and GDP ($1.2 trillion), Australia resembles a medium-sized European country. Its scientific output is that of a rich, advanced nation. According to Thomson-Reuters, Australia’s share of the world’s scientific papers published in 2006–10 was 3.17%, 10 times its share of the world’s population. Australia is particularly strong in molecular biology and genetics and in immunology. In both fields in 2008, papers from Australia garnered on average more than 20 citations each.

Geographically of course, Australia is quite different from, say, Spain or the Netherlands. The sixth biggest country in the world, Australia occupies an entire continent and is located almost as far as cartographically possible from both the ancestral homeland of most of its citizens, the UK, and its most powerful military ally, the US.

Australia’s unique geography is a factor in its science. The country’s vast, largely unpopulated interior provides an excellent site for SKA and other astronomical facilities that require dark or radio-quiet skies. Australia grows enough food to feed three times its population. If climate change imperils Australia’s farmland, the loss of production will be felt beyond its borders.

Hot topics

Climate change is a hot political issue in Australia. The failed effort in 2010 to establish a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse emissions led to the resignation of Australia’s previous prime minister, Kevin Rudd. On the day I met Chubb, the Australian Senate had just passed a different carbon-limiting scheme. Under the Clean Energy Bill, around 500 power stations, factories, and other heavy users of fossil fuels will be required to buy permits for each ton of carbon dioxide they emit. The revenue will be used to lower personal income tax and to fund clean-energy initiatives.

On climate change, Chubb said he regarded his role as providing the Australian government with the best scientific advice. The evidence in favor of manmade climate change is strong enough that governments should try to slow the pace of change, he said. As for whether a carbon tax is the best course of action and, if so, what its value should be, “That’s a matter for economists.”

Rich countries, big or small, typically fund individual scientists at similar levels. Size matters when it comes to particle accelerators, satellite observatories, and other expensive projects. Besides the SKA, Australia’s biggest project is the Australian Synchrotron , which was completed in 2007 at a cost of $220 million. Using the facility’s publications search page , I discovered that the synchrotron has yielded 507 journal articles. (However, the facility has faced funding and leadership problems .)

The recently announced Clean Energy Future amounts to another, big project—or, rather, projects. The multi-faceted initiative includes a finance corporation. Backed with $10 billion from the recently passed carbon tax, the corporation will invest in clean-energy companies that might have difficulty raising capital themselves.

On the topic of science education, Chubb cited a recent survey that revealed, surprisingly, that 70% of the undergraduate students taking chemistry at Australian universities are freshmen. Evidently, Australian undergraduates study chemistry more as a prerequisite for medicine and other subjects rather than as a subject itself. Chubb suspects the same could be true for physics.

Prompted by those and other concerns, Chubb is overseeing a new study of Australia’s science skills base and its relevance to the country’s present and future needs. Another study led by Chubb will assess Australia’s publicly funded research.

Besides seeking to improve the health of science and home, Chubb and his fellow policy makers want Australia to play a bigger international role. Rising ocean temperatures and sea levels threaten the corals that form the Great Barrier Reef, one of the country’s most valuable natural assets. By tackling climate change at home, Australia is contributing toward and shaping a global solution.