5.1
The foreign policy environment is complex and rapidly evolving with Australia's national interests facing new challenges and threats. Strategic and transnational risks are combining and compounding in ways which are both difficult to anticipate and gauge, and it is clear that foreign policy practices and procedures of preceding decades are no longer fit for purpose, and are in need of a refresh.
5.2
The committee recognises the excellent contribution of the foreign policy research community in Australia and the efforts within the Australian Public Service (APS) to develop and implement effective foreign policy in this challenging environment.
5.3
It is clear that there is a pressing need for foreign policy research and engagement, both publicly and privately funded in Australia. The work of think tanks, universities, and government departments must be agile, responsive to policy needs, impartial, and free from foreign influence.
The need for a new foreign policy institute
5.4
The committee notes the two calls for the establishment of a new foreign policy institute; the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) has suggested that it could serve as a model for such an institute.
5.5
The committee heard that such an institute would facilitate a systemic policy oriented prosecution of foreign policy related issues and provide contestability of policy advice to ultimately ensure the best policy settings. Further, such an institute would help shape new creative policy thinking which would benefit the Australian Government, policy makers, and the broader Australian community. Any new foreign policy institute would need to be structured in a way that complements the foreign affairs portfolio but is separate from it. It would also need to add to the broader knowledge landscape of the foreign affairs portfolio but have an interpretive role of our place in the world and assist government to fine tune requirements in this space.
5.6
While recognising the potential benefits of a new foreign policy institute to ensure the Australian community and business is best placed to understand and respond to a rapidly changing geostrategic environment, the committee is cognisant that this would be a significant commitment financially and also in terms of time for it to become established. As there are other models that could be considered to potentially achieve the same outcomes, the committee believes investigating options would be the logical first step in weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of each. This would include consideration of overseas models and exploring options such as a joint venture or a local presence with an existing international foreign policy institute.
5.7
The committee recommends that the Australian Government investigate options for the best model for effective foreign policy research settings, including how best to fund this model, to ensure the Australian community and business is best placed to understand and respond to a rapidly changing geostrategic environment.
5.8
While the committee encourages the government to consider the long term advantages of and best model to enhance effective foreign policy settings, the committee has suggestions to improve the current system and processes and outlines a range of complementary recommendations as follows.
The APS
5.9
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), and the APS more broadly, employs many committed and competent analysts and policy thinkers. However the rapid evolution of foreign policy issues places significant pressures on such employees' ability to research and process information.
5.10
As such, public foreign policy research undertaken by think tanks and universities is valuable to foreign policy makers. Such research allows the Australian Government to understand the nuances of complicated issues, receive up-to-date data and information, and ensure that policies are effective and targeted.
In-house government capacity
5.11
The committee notes the evidence received in relation to the recruitment and employment practices of the APS, and notably DFAT, which have an effect on the development of foreign policy capability and capacity. This includes evidence regarding language proficiency; security clearance requirements; and the provision of generalist or specialist training for employees.
5.12
The committee notes that DFAT has a culture of recruiting generalists rather than specialists, in contrast to the employment practices of other countries' foreign services. While this debate is long-standing, it deserves fresh attention in the context of Australia's challenging geopolitical environment, and the need for nuanced and well-informed policy development and implementation.
5.13
The committee welcomes DFAT's three year Human Resources modernisation program which aims to reform the way the department identifies its capability needs, and appropriately mobilises staff.
5.14
The committee notes the evidence received in relation to current security clearance processes which may be creating a barrier to recruiting those with much needed expertise. While such processes must be robust, the process should not act as an inadvertent impediment to Australians of a particular heritage, in-country experience or country expertise being employed by DFAT or other agencies. If we accept that foreign and security policy should be aligned, then processes for approval of security clearances should be consistent.
5.15
The committee recommends that the Australian Government consider reviewing the security clearance process to ensure it remains fit for purpose and that processes are not inadvertently impeding Australians with much needed skills and knowledge from being employed.
5.16
The committee recommends that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's Human Resources Modernisation program should consider the introduction of additional measures to attract individuals with specialist knowledge in identified priority countries and topics, including those with diverse backgrounds and those with language proficiencies.
5.17
While the language capability in DFAT is naturally high, the committee sees value in looking at ways to lift language capabilities across the APS. This may include pooling resources and looking at ways for the APS to better leverage available language resources in departments and existing research institutions.
5.18
The committee recommends that the Australian Government investigate new ways to leverage language resources to lift the capability of the Australian Public Service in this area.
Building public understanding
5.19
The committee notes that the work of the APS in foreign policy does not exist in a vacuum. Rather, the development and implementation of foreign policy involves a range of stakeholders with varying levels of knowledge and understanding. This includes business, media, and the broader Australian community. As such, it is imperative that awareness of, and literacy in, the global strategic context is increased.
5.20
Engagement through both traditional media, and innovative and emerging media such as social media and online resources is critical in increasing community awareness of foreign policy issues.
5.21
The committee recommends that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade consider strategies for increased engagement, with both the media and community in order to increase understanding of foreign policy issues.
Public funding for foreign policy research
5.22
The committee received a range of evidence which argued that current levels of public funding for foreign policy research are insufficient, and processes to apply for such funding are onerous and restrictive. Submitters also raised concern regarding the coordination of public funding, and the need for sustainable and flexible funding.
Enhancing coordination and policy relevance
5.23
A more strategic and coordinated approach to the funding of foreign policy research would be of clear benefit. The committee views that many of the more detailed proposals on how to best structure funding opportunities discussed in this report would be contingent on a coordinated, whole-of-government approach.
5.24
Enhancing the policy relevance of research does not, perhaps counterintuitively, mean narrowing the parameters of grants, but in some instances, allowing researchers more flexibility. While recognising the importance of data driven long-term research, the approach should allow for smaller and ad hoc research projects providing more dynamic and up-to-date information.
5.25
The committee also notes that ensuring policy relevance is a two-way process. Researchers need to maintain open communication channels with government to be sensitive to its needs, while government needs to be flexible enough to allow researchers the space to address important foreign policy issues, including not necessarily those making headlines or monopolising the attention of desk officers.
Promoting diversity
5.26
The committee encourages a diversity of foreign policy voices. It is clear that there are gaps in foreign policy research, and that many aspects of Australia's international relations receive too little original research attention. One manifestation of this is the apparent disconnect between research outputs and needs within businesses, particularly trade exposed businesses and/or those based away from Australia's major cities. Government can play an important role in sharing up to date information reflecting the changing dynamics in the region which would better equip business to deal with these changes.
5.27
The committee recommends that the Australian Government convene a task force to develop a whole-of-government strategy to identify gaps in data and information which will help to better deploy funding for foreign policy research and ensure that a diversity of views are considered. As part of the process, the taskforce should consider proposals outlined in this report, including the creation of pools of funds for: (i) innovative research; (ii) time sensitive research; (iii) long-term, over the horizon research; and (iv) priority thematic areas, such as peacebuilding or human security.
5.28
The committee heard several calls for original, empirical research to be incentivized through government funding. The committee also noted several specific calls for improved data sets, which would be useful to such research.
5.29
The committee recommends the task force on the whole-of-government strategy for funding foreign policy research consider the role of empirical research and how it can be promoted. The task force should analyse how the government can make research-relevant data more accessible, identify data gaps and consider commissioning research work to fill such gaps.
Facilitating exchange
5.30
Many submitters drew attention to the relative lack of movement between government and research institutions, and to a lesser extent, business, in the Australian foreign policy world. These types of exchanges are valuable in developing subject matter expertise, and ensuring the sharing of knowledge.
5.31
The committee recommends the Australian Government establish a pilot exchange program, between the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and foreign policy think tanks and university departments, at a variety of levels of seniority.
Senator Kimberley Kitching
Chair