In a public statement on 4 February 2016, CSIRO's new chief executive Larry Marshall said that the Australia's premier public research organisation needs to embrace change, and that means setting priorities with limited resources at hand.
In an email to staff he has fleshed out what this will mean, according to reports in the media including the ABC and Fairfax Media.
The Sydney Morning Herald reports that CSIRO's climate science will take the major hit with 110 staff to lose their jobs in the Oceans and Atmosphere division, and similar reductions expected in the Land and Water division.
In total, 350 staff will be affected.
The foreshadowed cuts have been met with strong criticism, including in expert reactions provided by the Australian Science Media Centre:
Dr Barrie Pittock
CSIRO Honorary Fellow and former leader of the CSIRO Climate Impacts Group
Larry Marshall, head of CSIRO, talks about the need to shift to more innovation and adaptation to climate change as the “science is established”. However, innovation and adaptation must be based on local realities and these details of climate change as it will affect Australians are not yet well established. Crucial are the likely changes to tropical cyclones, El Nino, flood and drought magnitudes and frequencies, and rates of sea level rise and wave height changes that will cause coastal flooding and erosion.
CSIRO has pioneered such research and has the skills to further clarify what must be adapted to and what innovations are needed. This requires cooperation between climate modelers, agricultural, ecological, water and marine scientists, etc., all of whom are in CSIRO as well as in Universities. CSIRO has a proven track record in this area and this should not be cut short. CSIRO has a vital role to play in adaptation to climate change, and related innovations, especially in getting the detailed scenarios right.
Dr Gerd Winter
Editor of the Australian R&D Review.
The foreshadowed cuts show a surprising disregard of how science, and in proxy innovation, works: it requires continuity. The fact that the nation's prime research organisation is prepared to do away with years of accumulated expertise, which required considerable public investment to build, is exactly what has been recently identified as Australia's weakness by a major report from ACOLA: short-termism.
It is foreseeable that the expertise now going to be lost will have to be built up again when the political wind changes... And the wind will change as the issue of climate change gains greater traction with the public.
Dr Graeme Pearman
Former CSIRO Executive member, former CSIRO Divisional Chief and Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Monash University
I thought I had seen it all before: a new leader, assuming apparently infinite control, driven by narrow and often tired ideological fixations, tampering with a national asset, CSIRO.
It is about time that CSIRO is overseen by an inclusive Board and that the Board is empowered to wrest control of its directions by having the CEO responsible to the Board. This would see that the research directions, culture and management, are based on inclusive views of what is needed by the Nation and its taxpayers, who are still largely its funders; that these directions are cognizant of the now and the future; distancing it from faddish views that, from time to time, arise in narrow sectors of the community and, indeed, sometimes include governments and their overly compliant bureaucracies.
This comment has been condensed. For Graeme's full comment, click here
Paul Holper
Former manager of the Australian Climate Change Science Program and co-founder of Scientell, a science communication consultancy
If the cuts to a significant swathe of CSIRO’s climate research activities proceed, Australia faces the prospects of losing forever its world-leading research and application work on climate. This research has been painstakingly built up over decades and places Australia at the forefront of work to better understand climate, climate change and its impacts.
At stake are internationally acclaimed monitoring and modelling programs. We knew next to nothing about oceanic behaviour and global changes 25 years ago. Thanks to CSIRO’s research, we are actively using this and other knowledge for forecasts, seasonal outlooks and long-term projections that lie at the heart of our ability to take advantage, and reduce the negative impacts of, weather and climate. Are we really prepared to lose all this?
Professor Samantha Hepburn
Director of the Centre for Energy and Natural Resources Law, Deakin Law School
The job cuts in the climate science division of CSIRO have been rationalised by the new CEO, former venture capitalist Mr Marshall, as being the product of a rationalised and streamlined approach to corporate management in line with startup companies such as Netflix.
The CSIRO, however, is a crucial agency for social and environmental progression. It is the Federal government government agency for scientific research in Australia. It seeks to develop the scientific knowledge required to manage Australia's wildlife, plant and land resources for ecological sustainability.
It is not a technology startup.
Mr Marshall also suggested that following the Paris summit, the question on climate change 'has been answered' and as such, the people qualified to measure and model climate change may not be best placed to determine mitigation and adaptation strategies.
This is a non sequitur. These two issues are inextricably linked. As a legal academic who has worked extensively in natural resource and climate change law, I am extremely conscious of the strong connectivity between the nature and pace of climate change and the regulatory and policy mechanisms that are needed to address it.
The work of the CSIRO and the expertise of the scientists and experts within Data61, Oceans & Atmosphere, Land & Water and Manufacturing is absolutely critical if we are to implement effective and informed climate change strategies.
The Paris Summit focused upon the importance of 'bottom up' strategies that utilise 'subnational' initiatives, informed by science and environmental agencies. Maintaining the integrity of the accumulated research and expertise of the climate science division of the CSIRO is vital to the overall effectiveness of Australia's response.
Professor Meric Srokosz
From the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, UK
I was surprised (and not in a good way) to hear of the proposed job cuts at CSIRO, particularly in the areas of climate and oceans research. CSIRO has world leading teams in these areas, who have contributed hugely to our understanding of climate change. While the fact of human-induced climate change may be accepted many uncertainties remain, such as local and regional impact of sea level rise, and the CSIRO researchers are well placed to address these pressing questions.
As the climate continues to change we need to better understand these changes if we are to deal with the consequences. This points to a continuing need for research on both the climate and the oceans (the latter being a key player in global climate). Therefore it would be wise to maintain CSIRO's expertise and research in these areas.
Professor Peter Clark
College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, USA
Mr. Marshall's justification for cutting these positions is based on his premise that we now know all we need to know about climate change in order to move on with developing mitigation and adaptation strategies. But while we know that climate change is real, the level of information about its possible impacts needed to develop the best mitigation and adaptation strategies is still far from complete.
Investing in this research will lead to huge economic returns with respect to helping guide the development of these expensive strategies in the most cost-efficient way possible. Cutting CSIRO positions in climate science does not make economic sense.
Professor Andrew Holmes
President of the Australian Academy of Science
Whilst the Academy is seriously concerned that CSIRO will no longer be leading Australia’s climate and environmental science research effort, we want to ensure that our national research capability is not lost in these important areas.
We call on the government to quickly make alternative arrangements to continue a comprehensive national program of climate research. Without a nationally coordinated effort, our diminished research capacity will mean Australia lacks the local knowledge necessary to adapt to a changing climate.
Our climate and environmental scientists are some of the best in the world. We wouldn’t stop supporting our elite Olympic athletes just as they’re winning gold medals. Nor should we pull the rug out from under our elite scientists.
Australia is internationally recognised for its expertise and unique position in climate and environmental research. Realistically, there are no other countries in the Southern Hemisphere that are able to do what we do. We have a singular contribution to make towards global and regional climate knowledge, and with this role comes a great responsibility to the global community.
Professor Matthew England
ARC Laureate Fellow, and Co-Director of the University of New South Wales Climate Change Research Centre
This is a disastrous move that will decimate ocean and climate sciences in Australia.
There seems to be no appreciation of how much this science underpins our
nation's interests - from agriculture, fisheries and water management through to infrastructure,
planning and finance. What a backward step in this supposed decade of innovation.
Associate Professor Nerilie Abram
QEII Research Fellow at the Australian National University
The notion that somehow the question of global climate change has been answered is ludicrous. Yes, it is now absolutely certain that the greenhouse gases we have added to the atmosphere are causing Earth’s climate to warm, but that big-picture knowledge does not allow us to predict and prepare for the many ways in which climate changes are going to impact on the safety and prosperity of Australia in the future. To not invest in understanding this enormous problem will cripple this country’s ability to effectively respond to the many challenges facing us as the Earth’s climate continues to warm.
Climate models, including Australia’s ACCESS model developed by CSIRO researchers, have undoubtedly played an important role in proving the physical theory that greenhouse gases are causing Earth’s climate to warm. But one aspect where models consistently show we still have much to learn about exactly how the pieces of the climate jigsaw puzzle fit together is in their ability to accurately represent the Southern Hemisphere. Gutting Australia’s capabilities in climate science will severely hinder momentum in solving this and many other unanswered questions that will directly impact Australia’s future prosperity and security.
Dr Elizabeth Haworth
Menzies Institute for Medical Research at the University of Tasmania
While accepting that review and restructuring is necessary for most if not all organisations, the CSIRO CEO and the Government must explain to us, the people, how further cuts of up to 350 CSIRO jobs will help to achieve better understanding and the evidence base to, at least:
- 1. Meet Australia’s commitment at the Paris Climate conference, December 2015, to cut emissions and limit global warming, especially in the week that the RepuTex report shows that Australia’s emissions are still rising;
- 2. Manage bushfire threats, especially after the raging bushfires in Tasmania and the continuing difficulty in controlling their environmental threat;
- 3. Water shortages in many states and devastating droughts in northern Australia, limiting food production and agricultural business.
CSIRO’s CEO states that CSIRO scientists are innovative and many will adapt to new challenges and areas of work, such as finding enduring solutions and positive outcomes to the health, environmental and business challenges due to climate change.
Rather than threatening staff with redundancies and paying out large redundancy settlements, would it not be better to provide opportunities for existing scientific staff to extend their skills and knowledge so they can assure necessary innovation and future economic success of Australia?
Professor Penny Sackett
Adjunct Professor at the Climate Change Institute, Australian National University and a former Australian chief scientist
I am stunned by reports that CSIRO management no longer thinks measuring and understanding climate change is important, innovative or impactful. Paris did not determine whether or not climate change is happening, scientists who generate and study big data did. The big question now, which underlies all climate adaptation work, is “How is the climate changing?” That answer will once again be determined by those scientists who gather climate data and model it. How can it be that our largest national research organisation chooses not to engage, indeed not to lead, the effort in finding the answer to that question?
Associate Professor Todd Lane
President of the Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (AMOS)
This is terrible news for climate science in Australia and threatens our ability to predict future climate and the inherent risks. Research at CSIRO is at the core of our climate modelling and monitoring efforts, and is essential for better future climate projections. Climate science is not solved - out to the year 2030 most of the uncertainty in climate projections is due to uncertainty about the ways to represent some physical processes in climate models. We know that the risks associated with extreme weather and climate events increases disproportionately as the globe warms. Cutting funding in this area now doesn’t make any sense.
Professor Will Steffen
Emeritus Professor at ANU and a Climate Councillor at the Climate Council of Australia, and previously the executive director of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP)
This is deeply disturbing news. The impacts of climate change are already being felt around Australia at an increasing rate, and there is more to come. We absolutely need to know more about the basic operation of the climate system - how it is changing and how best can we respond to the climate change challenge. The health, environmental and economic risks of climate change are just too large to sweep them under the carpet. CSIRO is Australia's premier research organisation in terms of fundamental climate science, and has built a well-deserved international reputation for world-class science that has contributed much to global understanding of climate change. It takes decades of hard work by dedicated scientists to build up such a reputation. It can be destroyed overnight by senseless actions by those in power. Very regrettably, this seems to be happening.
Professor Steven Sherwood
Co-Director of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales
Larry Marshall surely has a point about rejuvenating organisations and solving new challenges, but I worry about his statement that there is no further need post-COP21 to understand climate change since we now know it is real. Effective action requires detailed understanding. For example, Marshall speaks of contributing to the proposed agricultural development of the Northern Territory, but we don’t know for how much longer this region will still support agriculture or even human habitation as the Earth keeps warming, nor how much drying (if any) Australia's existing agricultural regions will experience. The groups that would help provide answers are the ones he says we don’t need any more.
Dr Paul Durack
Research Scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US and is a former Visiting Scientist at CSIRO
I worked at the CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric laboratories both in Melbourne (Aspendale) and Hobart during the period 2003-2011. I'm now based in the US as opportunities to undertake world leading research at CSIRO have dwindled over the last decade. This new round of proposed cuts makes a bad situation so much worse, and from the information currently being reported may lead to a key and proud Australian research capacity at CSIRO leaving Australian shores for good.
Associate Professor Kevin Walsh
Associate Professor and Reader in the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne
It is with dismay that I read the reports that climate research in the Ocean and Atmosphere section of CSIRO is effectively to cease, due to staff cuts. It is incorrect to say, as CSIRO chief executive Larry Marshall has stated, that the climate change science problem is solved, and now all we need to do is figure out what to do about it. No working climate scientist believes that. Also, it is very hard to believe that good decisions will be made on what to do about climate change if CSIRO has little remaining expertise in climate science.
Dr Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick
DECRA Research Fellow at the Climate Change Research Centre at The University of New South Wales
The latest round of job cuts from CSIRO is nothing short of appalling. The climate research work conducted by CSIRO has been pioneering and of global standard. While we know that the climate is changing because of human activity, we have not simply 'answered' that question after the Paris agreement - many more questions remain. Like other scientific fields - such as biology, chemistry and medicine - continual research is required to continually improve our methods, understanding and knowledge.
Research in any field does not, and cannot stop after an apparent question has been answered. In terms of climate science, much more research needs to be done on furthering our understanding of these changes, monitoring the climate as it does change, and making our climate and weather models more efficient and improving their capabilities. Much of this work was undertaken by CSIRO, and so now a big hole will be left. If we want to properly safeguard our country from climate change, we require ongoing fundamental climate research - we cannot create innovative and effective solutions towards climate change without it.
Professor Ian Lowe
Emeritus Professor of Science, Technology and Society at Griffith University and President of the Australian Conservation Foundation
It is always disappointing when science is cut back, especially when we need to be more innovative to overcome the economic problem of falling commodity prices. It is particularly bad when the cuts are in such areas as Oceans & Atmosphere, Land & Water and Manufacturing, as these are critical to our chances of a sustainable future. More worrying than the cuts is the language used by the new CEO. There won’t be scientists sacked, there will be "reductions in headcount"! And these aren’t research areas, they are "business units", headed not by top scientists but "business leaders". The cuts are "something that we must do to renew our business", according to the CEO. The language reveals that the government is trying to sabotage our public science body and turn it into a consulting business.
Professor Clive Hamilton
Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University
CSIRO climate scientists are world class and are researching the most decisive factor that will influence the future of the world. To slash their numbers at a time when the urgency of understanding and responding to climate change has never been greater suggests that the Government does not want to hear the facts. At least Mr Abbott was upfront about his denial of climate science. This new phase is more insidious.
