Blog Layout

Australia’s future is not its past

Roy Green

If the past is another country, then the future of Australia’s economy after the COVID-19 crisis will be a different universe.


And this crisis provides us with an opportunity to shape it for years, possibly generations, to come. But will we be able to grasp that opportunity? 


It’s not as though our recent past has been an unalloyed success. While we can claim almost 30 years of continuous economic growth, this record has been marred of late by a productivity slowdown, wage stagnation and increasing social inequality. 


Moreover, we have had to endure a decade-long debate over climate change in which evidence has mattered less than ideology. We have become bystanders to the existential impact of global warming, species destruction and environmental degradation, including the catastrophic bushfires of 2019–20 and coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. 


If there is a single factor linking the constituent parts of this experience, it is Australia’s overwhelming reliance on the export of unprocessed raw materials to drive growth and prosperity. However sophisticated the method of resource extraction, the truth is we are sustaining a first-world lifestyle with a third-world industrial structure. 


This was the message of the Harvard Atlas of Economic Complexity, which ranked Australia at the bottom of the OECD for "complexity", as measured by the diversity and research intensity of its exports. It is also the logical endpoint of the theory of ‘comparative advantage’, which asserts that we maximise gains from international trade by exploiting our abundant natural endowments in return for imported consumer goods from places that produce them more cheaply. 


Even if this theory were true in the past, it no longer holds in a world where manufacturing is undergoing massive transformation in a "fourth industrial revolution", encompassing robotics and automation, artificial intelligence, data analytics and machine learning. 

For economies like Germany, Switzerland and Japan, manufacturing and related services underpin high productivity and high-skill jobs. Competitive advantage is achieved not through low-cost mass production but through "smart specialisation" in global markets and value chains. 


By contrast, Australia has allowed its manufacturing sector to decline to dangerous levels, now down to around six per cent of GDP from 30 per cent in the 1970s. Even many of the companies that managed to survive the removal of tariff protection in the 1980s and ’90s ultimately succumbed to the high dollar associated with the mining boom. 


Consequently, Australia’s manufacturing deficit is increasing year on year, particularly in R&D-intensive "elaborated transformed manufactures" (ETMs). While ETM imports have more than doubled to around $215 billion over the last 25 years, ETM exports have increased only marginally to $36 billion, with the widening deficit most acute in engineering products (see graph)


Australia’s widening trade deficit in engineering products, 1995/96–2018/19

Despite much talk of the post-mining boom transition to a more diverse, knowledge-based economy, current examples of Australian manufacturers with a global presence are few and far between. The problem lies not in any lack of talent but in the absence of a coherent and effective national industrial strategy. 


While the COVID-19 crisis has exposed and accentuated this problem, it also provides the opportunity for a fundamental redesign of our outdated industrial structure. During the "hibernation" phase of the crisis, the Coalition Government did what it could, with Labor’s support, to retain jobs, strengthen the social safety net and ensure production of urgently required medical equipment. 


However, in planning for the longer term, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has also made reference to the bridge that must be constructed to a “better, stronger economy”. Industry Minister Karen Andrews has argued that Australia must “compete on value, not cost”. And Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has raised the prospect of industry support that is “niche, targeted and purposeful”. 


In addition, as US economist Richard Baldwin recently noted, “governments will have to undertake detailed thinking on production networks not undertaken since the 1940s . . . The containment policies will need to be intelligently crafted. And the longer the containment policies last, the more important it will be for them to be intelligent, flexible and well-informed”. 


This is a major economic challenge. And there is now every chance that, in meeting it, Australia may be able to achieve the political consensus that characterised the Hawke-Keating reforms of the 1980s and ’90s. If we are doubly fortunate, this consensus could even extend to genuine climate action, which has been so obviously lacking up to now. 


To this end, the Prime Minister has established a taskforce, chaired by former Dow CEO Andrew Liveris and comprising both industry and union leaders, to identify the steps that should be taken to rebuild and reinvent Australia’s manufacturing capability. The following are some essential measures that might be considered. 


First, we must overcome the fragmentation and under-resourcing of institutional policy-making in Australia. A new National Industrial Strategy Commission, or similar body comparable with those in other advanced economies, could develop national priorities in consultation with industry sectors to grow ‘industries of the future’, based on new technologies and business models. 


The initial task of this Commission would be to undertake a "knowledge foresight" to identify areas of current and future competitive advantage for Australia, as well as gaps in domestic supply chains. Clearly, enhancing self-sufficiency is not incompatible with a commitment to a more complex globalised economy.


Second, a more systematic approach is required to deepen collaboration between industry and research organisations, possibly around the CSIRO’s designated "national missions". This will require the Government to reverse the decline in public funding of research and innovation, now far below the OECD average and still falling as a share of GDP. 


In addition, the national missions will require an implementation strategy at the enterprise level, or they will simply remain abstractions. This might take the form of industry-led innovation hubs – again a successful model elsewhere – which would benefit from shifting resources from the R&D tax incentive to more direct targeted programs. 


Third, we should not overlook the contribution of entrepreneurial start-ups to economic renewal, including integration of the digital and physical dimensions of manufacturing, which is a key feature of Industry 4.0. Governments everywhere facilitate start-ups, and scaling up, through support for innovation precincts in cities and regions. 


Fourth, the Government can make a big difference for small and medium enterprises with public procurement policy. Too often we see local tenders overlooked in favour of large international companies on a narrow "value-for-money" basis, when these large companies themselves might owe their existence to another country’s procurement policy. 


Finally, industrial transformation will depend on the adequacy of our workforce and management skills. This will require measures to compensate for the COVID-19 hit to international student revenues that cross-subsidise university domestic teaching and research, as well as the earlier damage to Australia’s vocational education and training system from market contestability. 


The Government’s "whatever-it-takes" intervention to safeguard people’s lives and livelihoods has been clearly justified, but concern has been expressed that this will entail an unprecedented level of public debt. The history of wars and crises tells us that the only way to pay off such debt is to create a new economic growth engine. That new growth engine will be advanced manufacturing. 



Roy Green is Emeritus Professor at the University of Technology Sydney, chair of the Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing Hub and chair of the Port of Newcastle.



This article is taken from the recently published digital book

Australia's Nobel Laureates Vol III State of our Innovation Nation: 2021 and Beyond

click here

By By Harley Paroulaksis, CEO Paspalis, CEO Darwin Innovation Hub 20 May, 2023
Getting asked what we look for in deals is one of the most common questions I get as an investment manager.
20 May, 2023
The Small Business Association of Australia is dedicated to supporting SMEs, acting as their voice to government and helping them connect, grow, and prosper well into the future.
By By Shiv Meka 20 May, 2023
Sensibles may sound like science fiction, but this revolutionary technology is making waves in aged-care facilities, and has the potential to transform health monitoring at scale.
28 Mar, 2023
Alice Springs and the deserts of Central Australia don’t sound like a food basket, but they are for businesswoman and bush foods innovator Rayleen Brown.
By Gillian Cumming 28 Mar, 2023
A new report aims to lay the foundations for a deeper and more meaningful and equitable relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in the mining transition sector.
By Dr Saraid Billiards - CEO of the Association of Australian Medical Research Institutes. 27 Mar, 2023
If the health and medical research sector in Australia is to move forward, it must address gender equity, diversity, and inclusion- which means making the sector a safe and inclusive workspace for all.
27 Jan, 2023
A ground-breaking sheep technology system is bettering the businesses and lives of Australian sheep breeders thanks to a revolutionary combination of software, hardware, and support never before combined into one cohesive unit.
27 Jan, 2023
ANCA took an early view to look beyond Australia’s shores whilst developing advanced manufacturing technologies now viewed as ‘business as usual’
By Andrew Downs 27 Jan, 2023
As Australia grapples with a critical skills shortage, many are now encouraging young people to embrace a career in the trades, where a wealth of opportunities awaits.
By By Ben Kehoe 27 Jan, 2023
In 2016 I published a blog article titled Moonshots for Australia: 7 For Now. It’s one of many I have posted on business and innovation in Australia. In that book, I highlighted a number of Industries of the Future among a number of proposed Moonshots. I self-published a book, Innovation in Australia – Creating prosperity for future generations, in 2019, with a follow-up COVID edition in 2020. There is no doubt COVID is causing massive disruption. Prior to COVID, there was little conversation about National Sovereignty or supply chains. Even now, these topics are fading, and we remain preoccupied with productivity and jobs! My motivation for this writing has been the absence of a coherent narrative for Australia’s business future. Over the past six years, little has changed. The Australian ‘psyche’ regarding our political and business systems is programmed to avoid taking a long-term perspective. The short-term nature of Government (3 to 4-year terms), the short-term horizon of the business system (driven by shareholder value), the media culture (infotainment and ‘gotcha’ games), the general Australian population’s cynical perspective and a preoccupation with a lifestyle all create a malaise of strategic thinking and conversation. Ultimately, it leads to a leadership vacuum at all levels. In recent years we have seen the leadership of some of our significant institutions failing to live up to the most basic standards, with Royal Commissions, Inquiries and investigations consuming excessive time and resources. · Catholic Church and other religious bodies · Trade Unions · Banks (and businesses generally, take casinos, for example) · the Australian Defence Force · the Australian cricket teams · our elected representatives and the staff of Parliament House As they say, “A fish rots from the head!” At best, the leadership behaviour in those institutions could be described as unethical and, at worst….just bankrupt! In the last decade, politicians have led us through a game of “leadership by musical chairs” – although, for now, it has stabilised. However, there is still an absence of a coherent narrative about business and wealth creation. It is a challenge. One attempt to provide such a narrative has been the Intergenerational Reports produced by our federal Government every few years since 2002. The shortcomings of the latest Intergenerational Report Each Intergenerational Report examines the long-term sustainability of current government policies and how demographic, technological, and other structural trends may affect the economy and the budget over the next 40 years. The fifth and most recent Intergenerational Report released in 2021 (preceded by Reports in 2002, 2007, 2010 and 2015) provides a narrative about Australia’s future – in essence, it is an extension of the status quo. The Report also highlights three key insights: 1. First, our population is growing slower and ageing faster than expected. 2. The Australian economy will continue to grow, but slower than previously thought. 3. While Australia’s debt is sustainable and low by international standards, the ageing of our population will pressure revenue and expenditure. However, its release came and went with a whimper. The recent Summit on (what was it, Jobs and Skills and productivity?) also seems to have made the difference of a ‘snowflake’ in hell in terms of identifying our long-term challenges and growth industries. Let’s look back to see how we got here and what we can learn. Australia over the last 40 years During Australia’s last period of significant economic reform (the late 1980s and early 1990s), there was a positive attempt at building an inclusive national narrative between Government and business. Multiple documents were published, including: · Australia Reconstructed (1987) – ACTU · Enterprise Bargaining a Better Way of Working (1989) – Business Council of Australia · Innovation in Australia (1991) – Boston Consulting Group · Australia 2010: Creating the Future Australia (1993) – Business Council of Australia · and others. There were workshops, consultations with industry leaders, and conferences across industries to pursue a national microeconomic reform agenda. Remember these concepts? · global competitiveness · benchmarking · best practice · award restructuring and enterprising bargaining · training, management education and multiskilling. This agenda was at the heart of the business conversation. During that time, the Government encouraged high levels of engagement with stakeholders. As a result, I worked with a small group of training professionals to contribute to the debate. Our contribution included events and publications over several years, including What Dawkins, Kelty and Howard All Agree On – Human Resources Strategies for Our Nation (published by the Australian Institute of Training and Development). Unfortunately, these long-term strategic discussions are nowhere near as prevalent among Government and industry today. The 1980s and 1990s were a time of radical change in Australia. It included: · floating the $A · deregulation · award restructuring · lowering/abolishing tariffs · Corporatisation and Commercialisation Ross Garnaut posits that the reforms enabled Australia to lead the developed world in productivity growth – given that it had spent most of the 20th century at the bottom of the developed country league table. However, in his work, The Great Reset, Garnaut says that over the next 20 years, our growth was attributable to the China mining boom, and from there, we settled into “The DOG days” – Australia moved to the back of a slow-moving pack! One unintended consequence of opening our economy to the world is the emasculation of the Australian manufacturing base. The manic pursuit of increased efficiency, lower costs, and shareholder value meant much of the labour-intensive work was outsourced. Manufacturing is now less than 6% of our GDP , less than half of what it was 30 years ago!
More Posts
Share by: