Productivity Commission’s Draft Report on the Rural Research and Development Corporations

Agriculture is important to our national economy and to Australia’s standard of living, and can be expected to become increasingly so as there is increased competition for food resources internationally.

The Australian Academy of Science, the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering and the Australian Council of Deans of Agriculture jointly argue that the Productivity Commission’s Draft Report Rural Research and Development Corporations and its Recommendations do not adequately address important issues on the role of Australian rural Research and Development Corporations (RDCs) and their contribution to the overall productivity, sustainability and international competiveness of our primary industries.

The RDC matching funds model has served Australia and world agriculture very well, and has been advocated as a model in other countries such as the USA. Agriculture is important to our national economy and to Australia’s standard of living, and can be expected to be increasingly so as there is increased competition for food resources internationally. The level of investment (both public and private) needs to be at least maintained to preserve the benefits the industry provides. The public return on investment is high. There is no evidence to support the notion that removal of government funds will generate increased private investment in research, and indeed good reason to believe that removal of government support will remove incentives for private investment.

We believe that the issues raised in addressing its terms of reference can be more than adequately addressed in a more productive and effective way with much less risk to the integrity of the RDC system which has been an exemplar of a rural research funding framework globally for the past two decades.

Full comments are contained in the attached submission.