Academy of Social Sciences in Australia
Download this issue of Dialogue [PDF: Filesize
265.19 kB]
President's Report
Leon Mann
Social Sciences and the knowledge society
This is an important year for re-stating the vital role of the social sciences in the brave new world of the knowledge society - a broader concept than the 'knowledge economy' - and for taking stock of how the social sciences are regarded in Australia, and how that regard is reflected in the role the Academy plays.
The Blainey-Maloney Review of the Academies concluded that while all four Learned Academies are performing excellently and are well-recognised overseas, the Social Sciences (ASSA) and Humanities (AAH) Academies are hardly known in Australia and have very little influence on advice and policy making in government. The Review recommended a form of merger or alliance between the two Academies on the untested assumption that two ignored Academies will together make one influential institution. Both Academies welcomed the positive review of their performance but declined the call for a merger.
The Review also recommended an ASSA-AAH representation on the Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) and suggested this might be easier to justify or achieve if the two academies were to merge. It is both disconcerting and depressing that in Australia 2001 there is a high level Council which provides independent policy advice on innovation to government, taking advantage of advice from the Academy of Science and the Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, while excluding the humanities and social sciences Academies.
In January, the PM's innovation statement Backing Australia's Ability (BAA), was welcomed because it promised an injection of an additional $2.9 billion in funding for science research and industry innovation programs, as well as a doubling of funds for ARC grants over five years. Some pointed out that little of the new funds would be available for 2001/2; others noted that the statement did not address how to strengthen linkages in an innovation system characterised by a poor record of collaboration between government, universities, industry, research institutes and venture capitalists. Essentially BAA can be seen as catching up on six years of neglect of higher education and research. There is little in the policy that recognises that countries such as Singapore, Sweden, Israel and the US have not been idle in R&D, knowledge and innovation and that even with the additional funding Australia faces a massive task to catch up.
… the essential point is the vital importance of linkage and interactions between the multiple players in the education, research and innovation system …
On 3 July, Labor released its Knowledge Nation task force report, setting out a broad 10 year agenda for Australian research, education and innovation policy. Chaired by Barry Jones, the task force membership included two Academy of Social Sciences fellows, Peter Dixon and Jane Marceau. The Report has been lampooned for its untidy 'meatballs and spaghetti' diagram depicting the complex interactions between the key institutions and players that together comprise the 'knowledge nation'. Whether the diagram is seen as a helpful map or an indecipherable muddle, the essential point is the vital importance of linkage and interactions between the multiple players in the education, research and innovation system. My article in The Australian Higher Education Supplement on 11 July ('Picking meat from spaghetti') was intended to make that point. Indeed the first recommendation in the report went directly to the task of fostering collaboration by recommending the PM call a Knowledge Nation summit to begin the task of breaking down isolation and creating linkages between key players.
The report referred to the super-specialisation in our research organisations which discourage collaboration; competition for funding which leads universities to see each other as competitors rather than collaborators; and, the locking up of information in silos so that there is little encouragement to use it collaboratively. The task force is properly concerned about these features of the Australian research and innovation culture and system.
The report recognised the significance of the humanities and social sciences for an innovative society. It recommended strengthening research support for these disciplines through the ARC. Importantly, it called for humanities and social science representation on the PM's Knowledge Nation Council which would replace PMSEIC (see above) if Labor wins office at the forthcoming election. The report is long on vision but is short on analysis of how the critical linkages can be achieved to ensure that the nation buzzes with the new ideas and creative initiatives generated by genuine collaboration between all of the players in the knowledge society, including the social sciences, humanities and the arts. In the same week as the KN task force report was released the new ARC Board was announced. Under a new Act, the ARC has achieved independence from DETYA in policy making. The new Council, chaired by Peter Wills, former chair of the Garvan Medical Research Institute, is heavily loaded with science, technology, industry and business membership. While Richard Snape, Deputy Chair of the Productivity Commission and an Academy of Social Sciences Fellow, is a member of the new ARC Board, it is clear that again there is a shortage of social sciences and humanities experience and expertise on a peak direction-setting body in which they have a genuine interest and more importantly, much to contribute.
To put it bluntly, a society which treats social sciences and humanities knowledge and understandings as essentially second class or marginal contributions to the main action, is bound to remain a second class player on the world stage.
How can we move forward? What is at stake is much more than a need for recognition and confirmation that the knowledge and contribution from disciplines which comprise the social sciences are respected and valued. To put it bluntly, a society which treats social sciences and humanities knowledge and understandings as essentially second class or marginal contributions to the main action, is bound to remain a second class player on the world stage.
An opportunity to make the point that the social sciences count will occur at the Humanities- Social Sciences Summit in Canberra on 26-27 July. The theme of the summit, co-hosted by the two academies together with the Business-Higher Education Round Table and other key organisations, is 'Australian humanities and social sciences in the twenty-first century'.
The summit will examine and record the vital role that the social sciences and humanities play in the so-called 'new economy' or knowledge society. In regard to the social sciences, what contributions are economics, psychology, geography, sociology, anthropology, political science, law, and the other core disciplines making to the new knowledge society? The summit will be an opportunity to learn from some important Australian examples and to demonstrate what the social sciences can do when working alongside science and technology in creating, testing and fostering new ideas and practices.
Increasingly, new knowledge is created at the points of intersection between diverse disciplines that span the older, natural sciences and the newer, social sciences and humanities. An example is the collaboration between scholars in genetics, archaeology and linguistics to investigate the origins of human society, each discipline contributing its unique knowledge to build a more complete, accurate picture. At the Santa Fe Institute, a think tank in New Mexico, physicists and biologists meet together with anthropologists and psychologists to study the patterns that underlie the complex adaptive systems around us. In the new, global economy it makes good sense to study how change in one part of a complex system may have startling and unintended effects in another.
There are four main ways in which the social sciences make a contribution to the new knowledge society.
First, at the policy level, social scientists (((of every shade))) provide reliable information and knowledge about human behaviour and the nature of human society by drawing upon concepts, theories and methods from their respective domains of knowledge. Understanding people and community is crucial if we are to realise the benefits and deal with the problems of the new knowledge society. Thus, social scientists are involved in the design of organisations, workplace and education systems, and industry policy that underpin advances in education, learning, research and innovation. Of course, no single discipline has sole purchase on the design of educational, social and economic systems to create better schools, smarter research labs and more innovative industries. But social scientists, through their historical and comparative analyses of global systems, their study of the effects of microeconomic policies - such as education and training, public investment in fundamental research, the design of institutions and incentives to foster innovation - are major contributors to informed national debate and policy making regarding the growth of the new economy and the knowledge society.
Second, at the level of practice social scientists contribute by studying, advising and evaluating how people use the new technology and how they are affected by it. Several years ago I visited Xerox PARC (Xerox's research centre) in Silicon Valley where I met John Seeley Brown, its Research Director. Xerox makes state of the art fax machines, photocopiers and laser printers, but I was intrigued to learn from Dr Brown that Xerox PARC employs psychologists and anthropologists to work alongside its scientists and engineers.
The anthropologists study how work is done in modern offices (some of the most useful information is exchanged over morning coffee and at the office photocopier) and how people from different cultures use new information and communication technology. The psychologists observe and carefully record how people of different ages and learning abilities use modern equipment and software, for example, how they use a computer mouse, how they search information, use websites, and so on. The observations made by the social scientists are used by the new product development teams at Xerox to help design user-friendly products that can be used by many more people to access information, learn and make their lives more productive and rewarding.
Third, at the level of understanding and responding to community concerns about the knowledge society, social scientists provide analysis of the reasons why new ideas and initiatives fail and innovation is resisted. They seek an understanding of what can be done to address the concerns of those who oppose the sweeping changes in policy, practice, and values that accompany the new global economy and an appreciation of what can be done to assist those who are most affected by these changes. Political scientists and sociologists have much to say about social capital or social cohesion in facilitating economic growth but also in reducing inequality and community upheaval and improving health and well being.
Fourth, social scientists explore the knowledge-generation process itself. Scientific, scholarly and technical work, now known as 'knowledge work', is increasingly performed by research groups and teams working in laboratories, institutes, research centres, sometimes in partnership with overseas scholars and sometimes in partnership with industry. We know that collaboration is difficult and that many projects fail not because of a lack of scientific rigour or technical knowledge but because of the human factor - problems in leadership and direction, problems in communication between team members, poor team design, failure to learn from previous mistakes, destructive rivalry over status issues, ineffectual management support and so on. My own research as a social scientist deals with these problems and how organisations can significantly improve the creativity and innovativeness of their 'knowledge workers' by applying well-proven social science principles to assist in the design and management of research teams.
The humanities and social sciences have special roles to play in producing the major works that capture how we understand ourselves and know the world.
As I have been reminded by Sue Richardson, quite fundamental to the entire issue is the reality that the knowledge society is not an end in itself, but a means to the understanding and betterment of the human condition. The humanities and social sciences have special roles to play in producing the major works that capture how we understand ourselves and know the world and also in informing and influencing how the unprecedented changes occurring in science and technology must be used for the benefit, not detriment of humankind.
I am hopeful that the Summit will provide a record of the many ways in which the humanities and the social sciences make a significant difference to the many activities that comprise the new knowledge society. I hope too, that the Summit will afford another opportunity to drive home the message that progress toward the knowledge society is founded on an active and equal partnership between science and technology and the humanities and social sciences.
Leon Mann
2001
Last modified: 2 November 2009.