Text of a speech delivered by Dr Graham Mitchell, Principal of Melbourne-based Foursight Associates, an advisory service in Science & Technology. Dr Mitchell was guest speaker at the 2003 UQ Foundation Research Excellence Awards presented at the UQ Centre, Union Road, St Lucia at 6.30pm on Thursday September 25.
Listen to the speech in MP3 format
_____________________________________________________________________
The desirability of scientists coming to Australia – “the brain gain” – is a no-brainer. But is the departure of scientists an obvious bad thing? Graham Mitchell says no.
_____________________________________________________________________
Recently we celebrated National Science Week. It came hot on the heels of high-profile international conferences well covered by the popular press such as the BIO2003 biotech meeting in Washington DC and our very own Genetics Congress in Melbourne. During Science Week, scientists and science writers highlighted the excitement, outcomes, methods and potential of science in all its forms. Careers that are available in scientific research, and what life is actually like as a scientist and technologist, were brought to the attention of those thinking about their career options.
From a spate of articles recently about the “brain drain”, those contemplating their future career might conclude that the nation is facing a crisis of intellectual and technical impoverishment locally with an urgent need to “bring back the stars”. Whilst applauding any initiative aimed at a brain gain, the converse – brain drain – is not all bad news in the global endeavour called science. In terms of a nett loss of talent from our shores, I am only aware of the data that indicate this is a serious matter in mathematics and some sectors of ICT. It could also be a problem in the hot new interface areas such as bioinformatics and biosensing.
Case studies of scientists indicate that the lifestyle that scientific research offers can be marvellous – it certainly has been in my case in biomedical research. Moreover, one doesn’t spend a lot of time furrowing the brow and wringing hands about the potential benefits that can derive from discovery and translational research in terms of health, wealth and social development. Not to mention employment in high value, knowledge-intensive jobs, though not necessarily highly remunerated I regret to say! There seems to be no end to the expanding universe of human inventiveness and creativity and a life in science puts you at one of the sources of it. We also hope that we are the “clever species” and are capable of solving some pretty hefty environmental problems and making life on this planet better for all of us and the majority of our non-human fellow travellers.
Why do we do scientific research in Australia rather than simply enjoying life in this beautiful country and importing the final products of research just as we do aircraft, luxury cars, many pharmaceuticals, mobile phones, fine suits, premium paper etc? As Professor Ian Lowe of Griffith University has pointed out, there are at least five reasons:
1. To understand the natural world. We make observations and use tools and techniques to dissect them; we make hypotheses and test them through robust, proven scientific methods; we gather the data and analyse, debate, confirm, publish and celebrate the results. And we hope we are recognised for the little piece of the overall science jigsaw puzzle on which we have been privileged to provide some light.
2. To contribute to our culture in what is hopefully an enlightened society that takes pride in the achievements of its creative thinkers and “doers”.
3. To ensure innovation and commercial development. Science has its risks and is in no way an orderly or ordered process; the unplanned nature of much (though not all) of scientific discovery can drive some policy makers and funders nuts. Science is a moving feast and all scientists have in their memory bank examples of the recent breakthrough turning out to be an even more recent artifact. Commercial exploitation and product development, particularly in a hyper-regulated field like human pharmaceuticals, has to be meticulously planned and managed. But nothing is assured. There is probably not much room for either the dilettante or cowboy in science; certainly still room for the unconventional, fortunately.
4. To produce skilled people who can recognise a true discovery and who can later ensure that it is expanded into something of intellectual, public benefit and/or commercial value.
5. To keep able people in Australia thereby paying our “dues” to the world of science and the global pool of knowledge and legitimizing our access to the 98% of knowledge generated elsewhere – i.e. securing a seat at the international table by doing our 2% well. Good scientists in Australia are authoritative “receptors” for knowledge generated elsewhere.
The last two reasons specifically mention people but, of course, they are paramount throughout with a premium on youth. A notable change in the science scene is the recent increased involvement of most State Governments in direct investment in science. In the global competition for skilled people, one major plank of State and Federal government programs is to repatriate or recruit successful scientists through relatively attractive remuneration packages and investment in infrastructure in order to stay competitive in the science race. A nightmare for any scientist is not being able to do a particular experiment because of the lack of facilities and people will move to where the constraints are minimal and opportunities maximal.
Turning to the brain drain, it is well recognised by local practitioners of science that a cadre of locally-trained scientists abroad is of huge national benefit. Former mentors, students and professional colleagues overseas provide ready access to the “latest and hottest”, they are in obvious places to visit or take in Australian post doctoral students, they provide accurate information on labs, companies and people in other countries, they enable collaboration across boundaries and they are often highly-regarded, well-trained and knowledgeable spokespeople for Australia not only talking of beer and the beaches. Australian scientists are usually snapped up and are actually in demand in international forums – they are usually less formal, relatively non-aligned (we hope this remains so), they carry less historical baggage, they are well-travelled and their English is OK!
In conclusion the “brain drain” is an unfortunate shorthand to describe the mobility of scientists in most science disciplines. Perhaps “global reach” is more accurate. Many come back to senior positions in academia or industry with massive experience and superb contacts, again of immeasurable value to the nation’s science. Australia wins both ways.
About the speaker
Graham Mitchell is a veterinary graduate and University gold medallist of the University of Sydney. At the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (WEHI) he made discoveries in immunology and obtained a PhD in 1969. After post-doctoral experience in California (Stanford), England (National Institute for Medical Research, Mill Hill) and Switzerland (Basel Institute for Immunology) he returned to Australia in 1973 and established a new program in the immunology of parasitism at WEHI. This program became a major component of the global effort to develop new tools for the control of parasitic diseases, and of the ‘biotechnology revolution’. Mitchell was instrumental in establishing a long term program on the disease schistosomiasis in the Philippines.
In 1990 Mitchell was appointed Director of the prestigious Royal Melbourne Zoological Gardens where he introduced a number of new initiatives in local and regional conservation.
In 1993 he returned to biomedical research as Director of Research in the R&D Division of CSL Limited, Australia’s largest developer, manufacturer and marketer of ethical human biologicals and veterinary products. He was responsible for identifying and assessing new opportunities for CSL, nurturing external research collaborations, and the research component of the development of new products including vaccines.
Mitchell is recognised as one of Australia’s leading biological scientists. His expertise extends over a wide range of science and technology. He has detailed knowledge of the academia-industry interface, has worked in many overseas countries and been involved with the World Health Organisation for many years. He is an author of more that 350 publications, has received numerous awards for scientific achievements and, in 1993, was appointed an Officer in the Order of Australia for services to science.
Mitchell is an advisor on innovation to the Victorian Government. In another government role the Principals of Foursight, including Mitchell, jointly act as Chief Scientist for the Departments of Primary Industries and Sustainability and Environment. He is a non-executive director of Antisense Therapeutics Limited, Compumedics Limited, AgVic Services Pty Ltd, the Geoffrey Gardiner Dairy Foundation and the WA Institute of Child Health Research. He is a Professorial Associate of the University of Melbourne and with Nossal, Penington and Stocker has been a Principal of Foursight since 1996.
Media: For further information contact Andrew Dunne at UQ Communications telephone 07 3365 2802 or 0405 186 732.
