As AI reshapes labour markets, Australian policymakers find themselves reactive rather than strategic. Geographic isolation intensifies the risk. Political economy thinking offers better tools for governing technological transitions strategically, but these remain outside mainstream policy practice. Bringing them back requires political action: building institutions, allocating resources, and challenging existing distributions of influence.

Australian universities have transformed from public institutions into corporate enterprises through commercial accounting standards. With $40 billion in combined revenue and $110 billion in assets, they now prioritise financial metrics over academic mission. This shift compromises traditional roles of knowledge creation, critical inquiry and community engagement, forcing institutions to treat education as a business rather than a public good.

Australia’s search for an industrial policy has been long and contested. Centralised models drawn from small unitary states do not fit the realities of a vast federation with diverse regional economies. This Insight argues that the way forward is mission-oriented and place-based: the Commonwealth defines national missions and platforms, while States and regions adapt and deliver through their own specialisations, building resilience, competitiveness, and innovation.

Since 1963, Australia’s federal industry portfolio has been restructured more than 20 times. This extraordinary level of administrative churn exposes a deeper crisis: a persistent uncertainty about the purpose, priorities, and pathways of industrial policy. This Innovation Insight calls for a reevaluation of institutional maturity—one that strikes a balance between executive flexibility and enduring strategic direction.

I've been analysing Australia's innovation policy and discovered something striking: the Administrative Arrangements Order (which allocates government responsibilities) doesn't mention "innovation" anywhere. Departments are assigned responsibility for research, science, and technology, but no department is given responsibility for innovation itself. This helps explain why we keep cycling through reviews, Ministerial statements, and "renewed" strategies without delivering tran

The transformation of public administration from a domain grounded in public management to one dominated by political analysis represents a fundamental epistemological and institutional shift in the theory and practice of governance. The path forward is to reconcile its tensions, revisiting the lost arts of administration while embracing the political realities of contemporary governance. Doing so will allow public policy to once again be both effective and legitimate.

Modern public administration is now defined by systemic complexity, marked by institutional fragmentation, overloaded systems, and the rise of symbolic reformism. Today’s policy failures are not just technical—they’re conceptual. Consensus without strategic alignment, reform without clear problem framing, and consultation without coherence all contribute to a landscape where governments “do more” but achieve less.

This policy insight evaluates the current state of innovation policy through a multidimensional lens that complements existing frameworks.