The pandemic and the politics of Australian research governance

被引:1
|
作者
McCarthy, Greg [1 ]
Jayasuriya, Kanishka [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Australia, Polit & Int Studies, Nedlands, WA, Australia
[2] Murdoch Univ, Sch Management & Governance, Murdoch, WA, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Higher education; pandemic; academic research; Australia; governance; regulations;
D O I
10.1080/07294360.2022.2106947
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Following the 1989 unified higher education reforms, the Australian academic research system was built upon the notion of depoliticisation (i.e., keeping the political character of decision at one remove from governance) to govern the contradiction between research credibility and governmental economic priorities. The article argues that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the tension between independent research and governmental economic priorities. The pandemic, also, weakened university autonomy via the closure of the national border, reducing overseas student fees, a significant source of research funding. The article maintains that the conservative Morrison government used the opportunity to politicise research around commercialisation and national sovereignty. The argument being that the pandemic exposed Australia's research and development (R&D) dependence and with it the question of industrial sovereignty, prompting the government to couple academic research to industry policy. Secondly, the pandemic reinforced the conservative government's aim to concentrate research in selected commercial areas and to exert this priority on to the research funding agency, the Australian Research Council (ARC). Lastly, the article contends that the COVID pandemic, originating in Wuhan, intensified the Morrison government's geopolitical concerns over China, and this disquiet flowed into research policy, which problematised research collaboration with Chinese researchers.
引用
收藏
页码:679 / 693
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The politics of meta-governance in transnational private sustainability governance
    Fransen, Luc
    POLICY SCIENCES, 2015, 48 (03) : 293 - 317
  • [32] EDUCATIONAL GOVERNANCE IN ONE OF THE EPICENTERS OF THE PANDEMIC
    da Silva, Camila Ferreira
    Aragao, Roberth Cavalcante
    da Silva, Caroline Oliveira
    dos Santos, Miriane Feitoza
    PERSPECTIVAS EM DIALOGO-REVISTA DE EDUCACAO E SOCIEDADE, 2023, 10 (22): : 126 - 143
  • [33] Introduction to the Special Issue: Politics, Policies and Diplomacy of Diaspora Governance: New Directions in Theory and Research
    Ozturk, Bahar Baser
    Hoyo, Henio
    MIGRATION LETTERS, 2020, 17 (01) : 1 - 6
  • [34] WELFARE AS A GOVERNANCE DEVICE IN CHILE. POST-PANDEMIC HORIZONS?
    Villasana Lopez, Pedro Enrique
    COMUNIDAD Y SALUD, 2020, 18 (02) : 62 - 73
  • [35] Why and how do Australian Corporates Support Conservation Bodies? Implications for Governance
    Wells, Philippa
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE (ICMLG 2015), 2015, : 262 - 270
  • [36] Role of Internal Audit in Australian Local Government Governance: A Step in the Right Direction
    Pilcher, Robyn
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY & MANAGEMENT, 2014, 30 (02) : 206 - 237
  • [37] Governance & evaluation of service networks as integrative structures in Australian primary health care
    Fuller, J.
    Perkins, D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTEGRATED CARE, 2013, 13
  • [38] Corporate governance and environmental reporting: an Australian study
    Gibson, Kathy
    O'Donovan, Gary
    CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2007, 15 (05) : 944 - 956
  • [39] Corporate governance and carbon transparency: Australian experience
    Elsayih, Jibriel
    Tang, Qingliang
    Lan, Yi-Chen
    ACCOUNTING RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2018, 31 (03) : 405 - 422
  • [40] Corporate governance and environmental reporting: an Australian study
    Rao, Kathyayini Kathy
    Tilt, Carol A.
    Lester, Laurence H.
    CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS IN SOCIETY, 2012, 12 (02): : 143 - +