Mismatched student demand and industry need are shrinking university enrolments, completions and critical workforce pipelines.

Urgent reforms are needed to reverse declining university enrolments and completions, particularly in undergraduate and postgraduate climate, geoscience, materials and agriculture. Such disciplines also face declining research and development (R&D) spending, low patent applications and projections of falling workforces.

Reversing the decline

The recent Australian Science: Australia’s Future 2035 report highlights capability gaps in science from Year 12, through vocational training and university, to the workforce.

In the report, traffic lights tell us green is going well; orange, not so well; and red, backwards. Some green is there, but it’s largely overwhelmed by orange and red.

“The mismatch of student demand with industry needs is a long-standing problem,” says Professor Jacqui Ramagge, President of the Australian Council of Deans of Science. There is no easy solution.

Agility is a must

How can we address this mismatch? “Agility”, says Professor Graciela Metternicht, Dean of Science, Western Sydney University.

Early detection of changing employer demand is needed, then rapid adjustments in education, workforce and R&D. 

In 5 years, Metternicht contends, better data and clearer signals should guide students and employers on emerging workforce needs. In 10, Australia should have a balanced science workforce fed through a largely domestic PhD pipeline, aligned with employer priorities.

Ideally, science capability should be a planned, coordinated, and sustained element of national infrastructure, not dependent on discretionary spending, she adds. 

Universities need signals from industry

Driving these changes is complicated, given the many players and unknowns.

One challenge is the ever-looming economic pressures on students. Universities could run more tailored courses and block teaching to accommodate more hours of work, says Metternicht.

More advocacy from industry on their needs is also essential, says Ramagge. Particularly when paired with scholarships, she adds.

“If students can see very clear signals from industry that they really care about an area of study, then they’re more likely to go into it.”

This economic lens is required to support the all-important pipeline – tertiary to undergrad, providing graduates up to PhD level.

Public-good funding needed 

What of public-good funding? Industry naturally favours graduates doing work that would benefit the industry. So garnering scholarships for those whose work may, one day, be regulating industry is the biggest challenge, says Ramagge.

A radical solution might be taxing large businesses that underspend their R&D tax incentive, she adds. Unspent caps could then be used to fund public-good research.

Then, back to basics

Teaching an appreciation of science offers a more fundamental solution, according to the team at the Australian Academy of Science (AAS).

Emeritus Professor and AAS Fellow Ian Chubb AC says, “We specialise too early. The processes, capacity and unpredictability of science should be taught before the latest content.”

“The professional profile in Australia is also determined by the study choices of those 17-year-olds who are choosing to go to university.”

They are avoiding courses in much-needed geo- or climate science, driving national labour shortages in these fields and others. That is despite the plethora of well-paid jobs, says Dr Hayley Teasdale, Head of Science Policy and Advice at the AAS.

AAS has found that high schools don’t understand what these jobs entail. “It’s a complex awareness issue”, says Teasdale, “but I don’t think the lack of jobs is the problem”.  

The key may be encouraging critical thinking at community level – students, parents, teachers – to make well-informed decisions, a challenge indeed given the masses of disinformation and misinformation in circulation.

Chubb says every secondary student, at least in Years 7 and 8, should be taught to evaluate evidence.

Changing the system

“I’ve never felt this overwhelmingly consistent – not unanimous, but overwhelmingly consistent – pressure to change from every corner, the researching sector, the business sector, name a sector,” says Chubb of his time on the Independent Expert Panel for 2025’s Strategic Examination of Research and Development review.

Given the “present global fracas”, he adds, “we can’t rely on the rest of the world to provide us with a decent standard of living”. Under such circumstances, is there another option?