A balanced, cooperative approach

There's little doubt a diverse collection of industry groups, government bodies and public universities is united in its efforts to build Western Australia’s innovation profile.

Increasingly, all these players are being urged to collaborate on research and development, with expectations of better commercialisation outcomes in mind.

But finding the right balance of cooperation is a source of rolling debate in company boardrooms, corridors of power and academic circles.

R&D spending in WA by private enterprise is largely dominated by the resources industry, with massive projects such as Alcoa’s Kwinana alumina refinery and Rio Tinto’s $400 million HIsmelt iron ore smelting process starting to bear fruit for their investors.

Each of these large-scale R&D projects required considerable faith in the ultimate commercial application of the research.

Development of the 60 per cent Rio-owned HIsmelt joint venture included a $25 million federal government grant.

Advocates of greater government involvement in these kinds of projects contend that wider economic benefits are clearly possible from collaboration.

A prime example, according to those in favour of collaboration, is the success of Cooperative Research Centres, which have emerged as one of the most highly regarded focal points of innovation for industry in Australia.

As well, there are growing examples of commercialisation spin-out companies – a term coined in the past decade as a result of universities finding markets for their intellectual property.

“We’re getting better at bringing everyone together,” said Doug McEachern, University of Western Australia pro-vice chancellor, research and innovation.

Despite this trend, WA is still losing the hotly contested national battle over funds for CRCs – claiming just five of the 72 headquarters in total.

After winning less than 2 per cent of federal CRC grants in 2002, WA-based CRCs were allocated 8 per cent of the funds available under the program last year.

This is complicated, however, by the fact the state’s universities also receive funding for research towards CRC programs based in other states.

But research purists at universities say government funding for these centres should not be at the expense of money for more preliminary research that could lead to the development of wider application technology in the long run.

In the private sector, there are a number of government funding options available.

In the past 18 months WA companies have benefited from more than $26 million in innovation assis-tance from the federal government.

Notably, access to grants for small and medium-sized business is improving, according to AusIndustry figures.

And while the majority of private sector R&D is carried out behind closed doors, some elements of this research can be enhanced through collaboration, according to academics such as Mr McEachern.

A leading example is the Energy Research Alliance, a joint venture between UWA, Curtin University and the CSIRO with industry partners including Woodside Petroleum and Chevron Texaco.

The centre, which has a $30 million-plus five-year budget, is based in Technology Park and has been busy building the profile of oil and gas research in the state since 2003.

But just because WA does not fare well in the allocation of government grants does not mean it lacks innovative culture.

In fact, there is a large contingent of commercialisation players based in WA, all at varied points down the development path.

The state’s biggest university, UWA, has been actively involved in recent spin-outs, including the publicly-listed Advanced Nanotechnology Ltd and support for the WA Institute for Medical Research (WAIMR).

ANL recently booked an unaudited sales result of $1.5 million from its range of nano-material products and is making a name for itself in Asia on the back of its fuel dispersion technology.

WAIMR is a world leader in medical research, having a large role in the set up of Dimerix Bioscience, a biotechnology company spawned last year from a patent on the molecular interaction of G-proteins with cells.

According to the company, this strategy reduces drug development times and increases the chances of success.

Some other leaders in their chosen fields include Solbec Pharmaceuticals, Go Medical Industries, Structural Monitoring Systems, International Mining Technologies Pty Ltd, Seatrac Pty Ltd, QRSciences Holdings Ltd, Cool Energy, Clincial Cell Culture, Regenera, pSivida and Cell Aquaculture Ltd.

Perth’s QPSX Ltd is yet another involved in the innovation game, with a special focus further down the commercialisation road.

The listed company owns a large suite of patents in a range of industries and is itself involved in seed funding ‘incubation’ ventures.

It is a shareholder in Dimerix, among others, and has close links with the CSIRO in order to evaluate commercialisation opportunities.

One of its core businesses is defending intellectual property rights, an example of the penetration of innovative culture in the state.

However, the much-maligned lack of seed funding in WA is still an obstacle towards becoming an R&D hub, according to senior academics.

While the number of spin-outs from Western Australian universities is growing fast, the state is still behind the eastern states, particularly Queensland, which continues to grow its R&D expenditure.

A strong supporter of innovation in Queensland has been the Beattie government, actively encouraging state’s R&D.

The $35 million Queensland University and University of Melbourne operated seed fund is envied by WA’s commercialisation gurus and is widely regarded as a superior way of linking fledgling research with business.

But former premier and science minister Geoff Gallop’s InnovateWA policy from 2002, which was criticised early on by academics as falling short, has arguably left an indelible mark on the state.

The policy was a blueprint for addressing many areas of research identified as in decline and had a number of ideas for strengthening WA’s long-term economic competitiveness.