Fortieth anniversary review of the CSIRO European Laboratory: does native range research provide good return on investment?

Abstract

CSIRO established its first overseas research laboratory on biological control at Montpellier in late 1966 to start a programme on skeleton weed, Chondrilla juncea L.). The laboratory was set up to develop the science to underpin effective biological control, by parallel studies in the native and introduced range of Australia's pests. Since establishment within a French research agency (CNRS), the facility moved in 1994 from rented facilities into a purpose-built CSIRO-owned facility, with support from Australian industry bodies and the French government. This facility has been CSIRO's largest long-term overseas investment in research. The core focus on biological control of weeds has been increasingly supplemented by other research activities that are not otherwise possible within Australia. We present an economic and scientific review of the laboratory on its 40th anniversary. The facility cost on average Aus$1.3 million (2006 $$) per year (67% on direct research activities and 33% of infrastructure and administration) and generated at least $27 benefit for Australia for every $1 invested. Staff produced 279 publications of which 159 are in journals that are currently ISI rated (average citation rate in 2007 was 14.8 per ISI journal paper).

Biological control of weeds in Australia: the last 120 years

“…This was Australia's first investment in an overseas facility to support weed biological control research in the native range of the target weed. CSIRO subsequently rented separate premises before building new facilities in the early 1990s (Sheppard et al 2008). The success of the skeleton weed program (Burdon et al 1981;Cullen 1978;Cullen et al 1973), the fact that it was achieved by the deliberate introduction of a plant pathogen, the biotrophic rust (Puccinia chondrillina) Bubàk & Syd., and the demonstrated economic benefits (Marsden et al 1980) Montpellier facility, whereas there were significant contributions from New South Wales, the Northern Territory and Tasmania.…”

Assessing safety of biological control introductions.

“…Simulation modelling using data from the natural range in addition to quarantine studies can assist in predicting non-target impacts [85]. The cost-effectiveness of native range research for CSIRO has been clearly demonstrated [86].…”

A review of Australian classical biological control of weeds programs and research activities over the past 12 years

“…USDA or CABI). CSIRO continues to maintain two overseas facilities, at Montpellier in France (Sheppard et al, 2008) (used regularly by Victorian Department of Primary Industries (VicDPI)) and at Veracruz in Mexico, from which 16 agents have been released in Australia against four weed targets. A recent study of the economic returns on investment of Australia's funding its own overseas laboratory in France for 40 years estimated a conservative return on investment of 27:1 in additional to high science impact for the discipline (Sheppard et al, 2008).…”