Eric Knight

When will Round 26 of the Cooperative Research Centres program start? For Round 25, the official open period was only 57 days (8 January to 5 March). The program guidance for future rounds is "Future rounds of the CRC Grants Program are determined by the Minister. CRC Grant rounds have been held annually over recent years". In reality, bids for Round 26 are underway, or at least under discussion. It tends to be hard to get stuck in until the shortlist for Round 25 is known (soon, I expect), but delay is the enemy of a quality bid. Bids take time to develop. Participants in bids take a long time to decide to participate (not too many people are in a position to think and act on a 10-year horizon). Then they have to seek approvals. That may involve approvals from HQ out of the country and the inevitable response "What the duck is a CRC?" Starting early saves money. Those that start later often need to bring on more assistance and therefore cost in their bid. I argue that the application forms are not very difficult to complete. A minimal amount of external guidance is needed to address the issues the CRC Advisory Committee wants to know about. Building the trusted relationships that lead to participants deciding to join a CRC can't be outsourced. But rushed bids will resort to using consultants to source participants - a recipe for more cost now and member churn down the track. Start early and run your bid much like you intend to run your CRC. Your expertise, efficiency and networks are the best path to a high-impact CRC. Peacock Consulting doesn't write bids. We can help you decide whether to bid via a one-day structured workshop. We can coach you to develop your bid. We believe you are the best placed to write your bid. Get in touch if you'd like to discuss our approach.

20

2 Comments

Thanks so much for highlighting the science behind scaling ANU College of Business and Economics!

20

1 Comment

New article - Government Debt Collection After Robodebt In recent decades, Australian public agencies have increasingly adopted the practices of the private sector when recovering debts and have outsourced part or all of their debt collection to private firms. This practice gained notoriety during the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme, which identified ‘disastrous’ failures in the Commonwealth Government’s collection of social security debts, both directly and through private agents. These failures caused serious harm to thousands of people, including vulnerable low income earners. This new article, that I have co-authored with Lucinda O’Brien, Vivien Chen and Paul Ali, highlights significant gaps in the legal frameworks concerning debt collection by government agencies and firms acting on their behalf. It outlines law and policy reforms which would address the current lack of consistency and transparency in government debt collection practices, and offer greater protection to individuals when they are pursued for debts by government agencies. It argues that such reforms are vital to ensuring that the mistakes of Robodebt are not repeated. The article is available here: https://lnkd.in/gtuJyin7

23

The debate on industry policy in Australia is necessary but fraught with misunderstandings and the paucity of argument. Simplistic doctrinaire is no substitute for the consistency of a clear framework and or evidence, a key point of discussion with Tom Dusevic The Australian A first order condition is that we cannot waste public money - a return in investment on public funds is paramount. After all we have plenty of examples of wasted funds over the last umpteen decades in Australia under different political regimes (picking winners & feathering the nesting rent seekers is a function of political economy & short term-ism). Government interventions are particularly important and relevant when dealing with structural change - facilitating the speed and scale, to be precise; when staring into inequality & disadvantage; when dealing with problems of the commons (like climate change); when needing to address the capacity of the economy (skills, innovation - as examples); or when dealing with issues of public interest, public value, and the public good. At the heart of this is an important question of theory - a world of equilibrium or a world of dynamics. As general rule, small open economies can’t afford much intervention - which is why Australia should always advocate for globalisation and multilateral trade (even above the fetish of bilateral trade deals). But that doesn’t mean we sit idle when the rest of the world changes. Doing nothing in a dynamic world is not costless - a point missing in the current debate on industry policy. With the arc of disruption on us, when we are at a point of bifurcation not inflection (ie a point of structural change); when global dynamics of growth, trade, and geopolitics are shifting, being strategic and interventionist on some things do matter. Intervention too is not costless, but manageable if we have a medium-long term perspective and we focus on key economic questions of market design, competition, and civic questions of inequality. With our own economic allies hunting new sources of investment, productivity, and growth in the green energy transition and adoption of new tech - which are driving structural change - Australia needs a better debate and focus on all instruments of policy to drive economic development. A banal, simplistic, and narrow focus is truly unhelpful. Think dynamism in economies and think of how we drive the speed&scale of structural change with a medium term horizon, with a focus on dynamics not statics, and we might just get there. Adam Powick David McCarthy Jesse Sherwood Claire Ibrahim John O'Mahony Kelly Heaton Liesda Marsdon Mairead Davis Emily Hayward Matt Judkins Kari Keenan Carmen Roche Lachlan Moffet Gray Josh Appleton-Miles Ellen Derrick Hamish G. Jim Chalmers Andrew Barger Melinda Cilento Peter Harris https://lnkd.in/gu_i8hcW

98

20 Comments

As Julie Hare notes in this The Australian Financial Review piece, the Australian Government Department of Education's consultation on a proposed Tertiary Education Commission - the lynchpin on which the ambitions of the Universities Accord rest - has unified the sector, but perhaps not in the way intended. "In a rare act of unity, the country’s vice chancellors are livid at what they see as the diminishment of a centrepiece reform saying a proposed independent commission to oversee tertiary education is being crafted as a sub-branch of the federal department." There is a need to revisit the proposals, and for Government to craft an option which has the right resources, structure and culture to succeed. At Australian Technology Network of Universities (ATN Universities), we will continue to work with colleagues across the sector, the Department, and Minister Jason Clare MP to get ATEC right. Curtin University Harlene Hayne Deakin University Iain Martin RMIT University Alec Cameron University of Newcastle Alex Zelinsky University of South Australia David Lloyd University of Technology Sydney Andrew Parfitt https://lnkd.in/g_krv67E

22

3 Comments

It was good to discuss the Future Made in Australia industrial policy plan, and Act, with collaborator Prudence Gordon in our latest Trade Policy Decoded podcast. Australia, like everyone else, is getting into the new "great game" of green transition industrial policies, both a necessary but also potentially fraught, development. Our discussion was wide-ranging, as there are many tea leaves to read. Have a listen, then send us your feedback and, even better, rate the podcast! 😀

28

Aotearoa New Zealand is advancing towards digital credentials with the launch of the Trust Framework Authority, aiming to streamline identity verification for services like banking and government access. This shift, alongside plans to expand AI use, underscores the need to rethink data protection principles.   Markus Luczak-Roesch, Professor of Informatics and Chair in Complexity Science, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington explains in a piece for The Conversation why it's time to rethink data protection: https://bit.ly/4cyFsYA

38

1 Comment

Great to be at Federal Parliament today for the launch of our joint report “Key Policy Reforms to Support Tokenisation of Real World Assets in Australia”, a collaboration between Digital Finance CRC, Digital Economy Council of Australia (DECA), and Ripple. We had productive discussions with Senator Andrew Bragg, Andrew Charlton MP, Greg Medcraft, ASIC, Treasury, and others. Here are the key messages (more details in the report): 🥖 Tokenisation of Real-World Assets is a major economic opportunity for Australia: 🧊 Productivity uplift opportunity for the Australian economy => $12 bil in annual gains in existing markets, and a multiple of that in making new markets for assets that are currently not widely traded. 🧊 Large innovation uplift => You can do things with digital assets that can’t be done (or are difficult) with traditional assets - fractionalising the assets to solve issues in the housing market, increasing liquidity through applications of AMMs, increasing access, ... 🧊 Our position in the global economy => Globally, across all asset classes we estimate there is a >$2 tril p.a. opportunity, with intense competition between countries for slices of this global pie. We risk missing out as parts of financial services value chain shift overseas. 🥖The three key policy recommendations we brought to Parliament today are focused at removing the roadblocks to RWA tokenisation:      🧊 First – roadblocks in digital token representation of real-world assets => We need a comprehensive taxonomy of those RWA tokens mapped to Corporations Act or other relevant legislation. What this will achieve: o  Identify legislative blocks, e.g., bearer securities being prohibited o  Identify gaps and areas of ambiguity to clarify o  Identify undesirable legal classification transformations, e.g., equity becomes managed investment scheme or derivative   🧊 Second – roadblocks in Financial Market Infrastructure (FMI) licenses. We need a new license that matches the reality of digital asset trading markets, which combine the trading and settlement functions into a single inseparable function, and remove the need for clearing, hence no build-up of counterparty risk. Other jurisdictions have recognised this structural mismatch and corrected it via a new license for Digital asset markets and settlement.   🧊 Third – A New Digital Asset Markets Sandbox => This is needed to develop the new license type and provide relief in the interim while the license is being developed, i.e., the new sandbox could be a two-step approach to getting to a new fit-for-purpose license launched. Benefit of being quicker to implement (should be possible within ASIC’s existing powers) and buys time for the proper legislative process of licensing reform. Other jurisdictions have well thought through sandboxes - examples are in our report. Thanks Amy-Rose Goodey and Rahul Advani for the collaboration and the many participants for the exchange of ideas! Report is here https://t.ly/To_dd

311

9 Comments

In Aotearoa powerful and inspiring demonstrations of resistance fighting for a better future, while in the US they have openly given up to corporate power, turning elections into auctions. https://lnkd.in/gUq7XK37

For the next instalment on impact measurement, I'd like to have a discussion about the use of randomised control trials (RCTs). The Hon Dr Andrew Leigh MP is out there making the case for the greater use of RCTs and has established the Australian Centre for Evaluation to drive this forward. He argues that previous investment has been on "gut instinct" and the government is seeking to change this, "We’re not just trusting our intuition – we’re using science to better serve the public". However, he seems to make the case that its gut instinct or RCTs. I'm not convinced its that binary. We have used RCTs in a number of social impact bond measurement frameworks and whilst they provide quality data on what works, it comes at a significant cost and with a number of risks, including the ethics of withholding services to the control group. And despite having this high quality data, we are yet to see government policy and investment shift to fund these proven initiatives at scale. I strongly agree that we need data rather than trusting our intuition but would argue that we can get quality data without the need for RCTs, particularly as few organisations can afford to implement them or get on board with some of the ethics of using these in social service delivery to vulnerable groups. It can be argued that its a gold standard, but do we need a gold standard to fund better evidence based practice. Is this required for government to fund business innovation? Not that I'm aware. We need an impact measurement practice that is robust but also fit for purpose for our sector. I know this is probably a controversial position to many so would love to open up the discussion. What do you think?

48

34 Comments

"We are a destination of choice for students across the world and Australian universities are the cornerstone of our national innovation ecosystem."   University of Sydney Vice-Chancellor and President Mark Scott writes in The Australian Financial Review about proposed legislation that asks universities to fix a housing problem they didn’t create and he calls for postponement of implementation for 12 months to allow for proper consultation.   Scott writes: International students make up only 4% of the Australian rental market. When we had similar numbers of students here in 2019, there was nothing like the current housing shortage.   NAB reported half of Australia’s GDP growth last year came from international students. Not just at universities, but through their participation in travel, tourism, hospitality and allied health services.   Every university understands we need managed growth in international students. We need to be able to work closely with government at a measured pace to develop evidence-based solutions which can be influenced and are addressed by policy.   Read more: https://lnkd.in/gQqPV5Hf

113

6 Comments

According to evidence from CBE, between 50 and 90 per cent of policy solutions proven to work in small-scale testing lose efficacy when implemented at a larger scale. This is known as a ‘voltage drop’ and can be costly in time and resources. The research, from ANU expert Professor John List, outlines a new approach to optimally generating policy-based evidence, where experts consider the possibilities of full implementation earlier in the research process. Read this ANU policy brief with the key takeaways from John’s paper: https://ow.ly/nELs50SQO7z #ANUCBE John List

12

Dialogue Den: Ethics, Governance, and Responsible Use of AI in a Changing Workplace! This presentation was developed by Adrian Cropley OAM, FRSA, IABC Fellow, SCMP, GCSCE and Bonnie Caver, SCMP® for the IABC World Conference, taking place on June 26 at 9:45 a.m. CT. AI in the workplace (and our daily lives) is here to stay. Yet, what we see in use today is only the beginning of what working with AI will look like in the future. With this evolution, there will be many ethical crossroads that organisations and professionals must address, and creating governance and responsible use guidelines will be a role for all leaders in the organisation. Yet, communication professionals are ideally placed to lead these conversations internally and externally, especially when navigating the shifting state of trust and social expectations. This session is designed to give leaders the tools to do just that. Bonnie Caver of Reputation Lighthouse and Adrian Cropley of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence have developed the framework for an enlightening discussion about AI. With collaboration across ethics, reputation, change management, strategic communication leadership, and training disciplines, attendees will be led through a thoughtful journey of creating an organisation’s AI ethics, governance, and responsible use practice while aligning with existing ethics and governance organisational policies. Global best practices and lessons learned will be shared, and attendees are encouraged to bring their challenges and wins so that participants can learn from each other in this facilitated discussion. Click here to learn more about the #IABC World Conference speakers: https://lnkd.in/gpAwPHQt #Communication #IABC24

8

I have been nominated as a candidate for the ITS Australia Board of Directors and to represent the University of Technology Sydney from 2025 onwards. The online voting has opened today and will close on Wednesday, 27 November, as announced via dedicated links sent to ITS Australia core members:   - Adelaide 3:30pm - Brisbane 3:00pm - Melbourne 4:00pm - Perth 1:00pm - Sydney 4:00pm If you wonder what I have done over the past 10 years as part of ITS Australia membership and what my plans are if I get elected, please read below: ITS Australia contribution summary: I have been involved with ITS Australia for the last 10 years, previously as part of CSIRO and, more recently, as part of the University of Technology Sydney. Over the years, I have organised several presentations and special sessions and invited renowned speakers from all around the world. I have also held demonstration booths and served as chair reviewer and chair organiser for several ITS Australia summits and various national conferences. I was a co-organiser of the Data Community of Practice and represented scientific progress on various mobility issues several times. In 2024, I was part of the ITS Australia Summit, organised demonstrations of our AI and transport capabilities at UTS, and also helped to organise the ITS Career Expo for NSW students to join the summit for free and engage with industry. That was really well received: more than 100 students joined, and I was so happy to receive so much positive feedback after this. What’s my plan if I get elected? For the next 2 years, if I get elected as an ITS Australia Board Director, I plan to leverage my scientific position and knowledge in the ITS field and: -         Contribute to organising and holding a joint event between two large conferences on the Gold Coast in 2025, such as the IEEE ITSC conference and the ITS Australia Summit. As a scientific representative, I will be part of both organising committees and work towards leveraging joint plenaries/demonstrations/presentations that can benefit both the international A* representatives in transportation science that will come to Australia and the Industrial Australian landscape via our national industry and government representatives that will come to the event. -         Help the Next-gen community by expanding the free student access to ITS Australia events for internships and industry -         Organise joint scientific and innovation events across academia and the industry sector to promote ongoing collaboration and idea generation. -         Promote the ITS Australia events and its benefits to members and new emerging industries. If you are an ITS Australia member and would like to hear more from scientists like me working in ITS, please vote! To vote, use your access key and visit: https://lnkd.in/g8cTGUzn #itsaustralia #boardofdirectors #voting UTS Data Science Institute Fang Chen, Distinguished Professor

46

4 Comments

Voice from the past: how one university is countering AI with ancient examination techniques The University of South Australia is reintroducing the oral tradition of viva voce to test students’ knowledge more effectively https://lnkd.in/gY-KZZ-J

7

Very much enjoyed the UWA Public Policy Institute Roundtable today on Inequality with Productivity Commission Deputy Commissioner Catherine de Fontenay. Advance Australia Fair - Yes or No? The answer in the recently released PC report Fairly Equal? Economic Mobility in Australia (download here https://lnkd.in/gCz5GshY) is generally yes with some "worrying signs". What are some of the positives (and negatives) in terms of inequality? Australia has high relative income mobility as measured by the wonderfully named Rank Rank Slope (which measures a person's rank position in the income distribution against their parents). For Australia the RRS is much lower than most comparable countries which means there is a high degree of income mobility in Australia. And educational attainment and good health remain key to the story of income mobility. But at both the very top and the bottom of the income distribution there is a high degree of persistence in income decile position. This means that the children of very low or high income parents stay in that position far more than others in the distribution. As with unemployment, most poverty spells are relatively short but for far too many we see persistence and the longer the spell the more difficult it is to exit. We need to do more in Australia for those in the bottom of the income distribution and facing persistent poverty. The PC work on inequality is very important. Great to see the PC initiate work in this and other streams such as Indigenous policy and energy and climate change research. Assoc. Prof. Paul J. Maginn, Clare Feenan Alison Preston James Arvanitakis Danika Adams Mark Glasson Alex Hughes Amanda Davies Mike Rowe Annie Fogarty AM #poverty #inequality

51

3 Comments

Why is stakeholder engagement valuable for AI governance?  HTI’s third Lighthouse Case Study on AI Governance examines the stakeholder engagement undertaken by University of Technology Sydney and its development and implementation of its AI policies, procedures and governance.  This case study explores how UTS is using and governing AI, the role of stakeholder engagement, and the policies, procedures and governance structures developed to manage the risks and secure the benefits of AI systems. The key governance insights include: ·      Stakeholder engagement is an important and valuable process that can improve policies, build stakeholder trust, and increase the confidence of decision-makers in relation to the adoption and use of AI systems.   ·      Putting in placeclear policies and procedures to govern the adoption and use of AI systems allows for better and easier decision-making by senior leadership.   ·      Successful AI governance requires an interdisciplinary approach, and it is essential that staff with different backgrounds and expertise have an opportunity to come together to discuss issues and approve solutions. HTI’s Lighthouse Case Study Series is part of its AI Corporate Governance Program. These case studies aim to highlight the insights generated and challenges faced by organisations on the frontier of human-centred AI development and deployment. The first and second case studies in the series featured Telstra and KPMG Australia. Thanks to Susan Gibson and Prof Simon Buckingham Shum for their input to this case study. This resource was developed by Llewellyn Spink Nicholas Davis and Lauren Solomon. https://lnkd.in/gHK2F3UC

28

One day, in the future, if the world has not imploded, the AICD's Foundations of Governance course book will use this as a case study in what not to do, and how not to do it.. ttps://https://lnkd.in/gsQ4wnsj

12

3 Comments

Australia relies heavily on its universities for research and development, and proposals to reform their governance should take this into account, as Pamela Hanrahan explains in her latest Company Director column. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gzpNRjN7 – Australian Institute of Company Directors #universities #tertiaryeducation #researchdevelopment #governance

17