Australian government innovation report Part II: "Innovation in Government"

The previously reported "Review of the National Innovation System Report - Venturous Australia" -- interestingly and surprisingly -- includes a whole section entitled "Innovation in Government".

Its recommendations are:
  • Recommendation 10.1: Consideration should be given to extending the platform created to enforce payments and administer income contingent loans through the tax system; for instance, by extending income contingent loans for tertiary education outside universities and for sole trader entrepreneurs seeking to fund innovative projects.

  • Recommendation 10.2: An advisory committee of web 2.0 practitioners should be established to propose and help steer governments as they experiment with web 2.0 technologies and ideas.

  • Recommendation 10.3 An Advocate for Government Innovation should be established to promote innovation in the public sector.

  • Recommendation 10.4: A rigorous policy of evaluating all Australian Government innovation programs ­ and other relevant programs ­ be established. In a way analogous to the requirement that new regulation cannot be implemented without adequate regulatory impact analysis, a policy should be adopted whereby new programs cannot be implemented without an adequate evaluation strategy and funding for evaluation including the collection of `base data' to evaluate the effects of the program.

  • Recommendation 10.5: Experimentation in innovative policy and administration should be a major theme of the current refashioning of federal relations. States and Territories should be able to bid for federal funds to pioneer innovative approaches and to have their innovations properly and independently evaluated. This could be taken up within the COAG National Partnership Rewards payments currently being negotiated.

  • Recommendation 10.6: The Australian Government should recognise its role as an active participant in facilitating innovation through procurement practices. In this context, the Government should: ·actively manage its ability to enable and demand innovation in procured services and products given its significant presence as a major purchaser; ·in procurement, be open to participating in risk sharing in relation to innovation demanded; ·explore the use of forward purchase commitmentsas a means of fostering more innovative approaches to government procurement; and ·work with the State and Territories to implement a pilot Small Business Innovation Contracting program based on the US SBIR design principles, to strengthen the growth of highly innovative firms in Australia. The Advocate for Government Innovation should operate as a source of expertise and seed funding for the resourcing of such approaches to procurement.

  • Recommendation 11.1: National innovation priorities as set out in this Review, be a focus of innovation policy and activities and the National Innovation Council be charged with ongoing evaluation of the alignment of public innovation policy with National Research and Innovation priorities.

  • Recommendation 12.1: The Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council should be replaced by a new National Innovation Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, and supported by a small but high level Office of Innovation. An International Innovation Advisory Panel would be formed to provide advice to the Council on international engagement.

  • Recommendation 12.2: To more effectively coordinate the innovation activities of public sector research agencies and to provide a source of coordinated advice to the National Innovation Council, a Research Coordination Council should be established.

  • Recommendation 12.3: The Minister for Innovation should be a joint signatory to any Cabinet proposals from across government significantly bearing on the nationalinnovation agenda, to ensure co-ordination.

  • Recommendation 12.4: Innovation Australia should be the single major agency responsible for delivering innovation program support for firms. Such programs would be delivered through the AusIndustry network.

  • Recommendation 12.5: The Australian Government and State and Territory governments should adopt a framework of principles for innovation interventions (as setout in this Review) to enhance consistency in approach across governments and improve the overall accessibility and efficiency of the suite of interventions.

  • Recommendation 12.6: That governments review the existing suite of programs and develop any new programs in the light of these principles. All program proposals should contain clear ex ante evaluation criteria, and provide for the provision or collection of relevant base line data before program implementation. Design principles and rules should be applied consistently. (See proposed design principles in Chapter 4 and Annex 4)

  • Recommendation 12.7: That senior government officials develop a collaborative mechanism to oversee the agreed approach and report periodically to relevant Australian Government and State and Territory ministers.

  • Recommendation 12.8: That common metrics, performance indicators and mechanisms for collecting and sharing data be developed and adopted by all jurisdictions.

  • Recommendation 12.9: That governments together develop a single mechanism (such as a web portal) for providing information to clients about access to the full range of Australian and State and Territory government innovation programs.

  • Recommendation 12.10: The ABS should be resourced to ensure the longevity and international consistency of innovation data collections and their availability to facilitate effective policy development. The National Innovation Council should advise where additional data collection is required to produce its Annual Statement on Innovation.

  • Recommendation 12.11: An Annual Statement on Innovation should be prepared by the National Innovation Council and incorporate a clear set of framework indicators. (An initial proposal for these indicators is set out in Annex 12).

  • Recommendation 12.12: The Australian Government, with the guidance of the National Innovation Council, should establish rigorous and consistent evaluation processes for innovation programs in line with the principle that the function should be carried out on an armslength and transparent basis.

  • Recommendation 12.13: A National Centre for Innovation Research should be established to advance knowledge of the innovation system through high quality, independent research which is strongly relevant to policy and practice.

Related:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Java, MySql increased performance with Huge Pages

[Resources updates: 2010.07.07 , 2009.11.03 , 2009.05.27 ] Long running, large memory, high performant applications often have special needs with respect to their memory management. On Linux, Solaris and other modern OSes, the translation look-aside buffer ( TLB ) - whose page size of 4k for many CPUs/OSes - becomes a scalability issue in these extreme conditions. In order to get around TLB scalability issues, huge page sizes are used to reduce the impact on performance. This can be of use to installations with large scale Java, MySql and other large memory applications. 300% improvement : " Well, in my case, I was able to achieve an over 3x improvement in my EJB 3 application, of which fully 60 to 70% of that was due to using large page memory with a 3.5GB heap. Now, a 3.5GB heap without the large memory pages didn't provide any benefit over smaller heaps without large pages. Besides the throughput improvements, I also noticed that GC frequency was cut down by two-third
Read more

Canadian Science Policy Conference

The Canadian Science Policy Conference is to held in Toronto, October 28-30, 2009. While the five themes , sub-panels and speakers looking both interesting and relevant, I am disappointed and perhaps a little alarmed that there appears to be no (explicit) mention of research data issues, research data management or research data archiving, despite the series of Canadian consultations examining these issues ( National Consultation on Access to Scientific Research Data (NCASRD) , 2004; National Data Archive Consultation Building Infrastructure for Access to and Preservation of Research Data , 2002; Data Access in Canada: Issues for Global Change Research” (Royal Society of Canada), 1996 ) and indicating the pressing need for 1) A research data archiving strategy and policy; 2) A research data archive. I think this is an issue that has too long been neglected (although there are some positive signs, like International Polar Year ), impacting Canadian science and innovation, especiall
Read more

Project Torngat: Building Large-Scale Semantic 'Maps of Science' with LuSql, Lucene, Semantic Vectors, R and Processing from Full-Text

Image
Project Torngat is a research project here at NRC - CISTI   [ Note that I am no longer at CISTI and that I am now continuing this work at Carleton University - GN 2010 04 07 ] that looks to use the full-text of journal articles to construct semantic journal maps for use in -- among other things -- projecting article search results onto the map to visualize the results and support interactive exploration and discovery of related articles, term and journals. Starting with 5.7 million full-text articles from 2200+ journals (mostly science, technology and medical (STM)), and using LuSql , Lucene , Semantic Vectors , R , and processing , a two dimensional mapping of a 512 dimension semantic space was created which revealed an excellent correspondence with the 23 human-created journal categories: Semantic Journal Space of 2231 Journals Scaled to Two Dimensions This initial work was initiated to find a technique that would scale, and follow-up work is looking at integrating t
Read more