The Relative Theory

Doctors of Philosophy need to provide public service

For a long time, science has needed a publicist.  This has never been more evident than in the climate change debate, in a world where the competing argument of industry and politics has a calculated and expansive media presence, Science relies on the noneducational layman's translation of compromised media to reach the masses. 

It needs to be explained that in Australia, CSIRO does a fantastic job of having science deliver outcomes for industry. They provide relevant and critical research for the countries heart beat industries of agriculture, mining and information technology. As it should, a large portion of its funding comes from the government  and in tern, the public for which these industries serve.

The other area of major research is the university sector, and its high time that university presents a unified strategy with other research organisations in areas of national importance. Climate, Sustainability and Agriculture. Agriculture and its long term future is in crisis. While national conscious and debate centers around mining. Agriculture, responsible for $155 billion a year of the countries GDP is breaking down. drought, water security, bio-security  low soil fertility and global warming caused by climate change has to borrow a term reached critical mass. Australia without farming is an Australia without identity.

This possibility is very real, and very serious.

The main stream media seems focused debating the existence of climate change, and the involvement of mankind in relation, and the industrial sector is trying to earn as much out of finite minerals as native title will allow, yet the industry that has sustained our economy through the recession and depression and remains the lifeblood of rural Australia is falling into palliative care when a unified front from science could revive it as a whole.

University research success is currently measured in many ways by publication status. To simplify, they conduct research, and publish their findings, the more revered the journal the greater the status the university is held. The more impressive a university status the easier it is to obtain funding. This has a positive effect on our education system, don’t get me wrong, status helps gain international attention for our fine schools. But it creates a problem that is not addressed.

Currently, the process for research as it stands is a scientist has a hypothesis, applies for a grant, performs research to support their hypothesis, and publishes findings. Mainly in the university publishing domain, if the research appears to be on public interest, the media may pick up exerts and release those to the public. Here in lies the problem. Universities have a propensity to promote research that appeals to other educational institutions, Government funded research which lends itself to be industry and public focus is heavily moderated by the media by the time it gets to the general population. The net result is very little socially relevant research gets seen in its entirety by the general public. This is not to say you can go to Melbourne University Publishing tomorrow and discover the secrets of the universe and who killed Kennedy just by leafing through the library directory. It’s just what gets read by the average citizen is so cloudy that its natural that it flames the fires of scepticism and conspiracy or flagged as a tool of political skulduggery. Practical science appears to be operating to two very different levels. One of which research is buried under a mountain of rigidly stubborn academia, the other heavily watered down laymen twitter grab. 

My experience is certainly not science; I only have some insight through association. My wheel house is music, and in my experience a common instance in music is when great musicians fall into the trap of writing music that appeals only appeals to other musicians, forgetting that musicians only go watch performances if they are on a guest list, and listen to music given to them. Punters buy records and go see bands, and punters would not know a pentatonic from a mode. The other way it can go is song writers get so consumed with writing something that people want to hear, the end result gets in the way of the music’s originality.

What would be great to see happen, was a 3 step process. We need a scientific (not a government) inquiry into the 3 main areas of national importance. Climate, Sustainability and Agriculture and have the findings released to the public domain unimpeded.. So the Australian public is aware of the issues, and the severity without the specter of political agenda. If critical issues are identified, then recommendations of the steps that need to be taken to deliver outcomes, and then coverage on their delivery.

When I raise issues or concerns relevant to science in this country to people within science, I am very quickly shut down with "you don't understand the process" then its little wonder its very hard to get for average Australian to get the full picture. People want to have things explained to them. We want to know, and we will vote for people who will fund research if we do.