Australian university administrators have been accused of deliberately dragging out research fraud investigations to avoid external scrutiny, taking months or even years to resolve cases.

Research integrity campaigner David Vaux said Australian universities had spent years failing to resolve research misconduct allegations that had led to dozens of journal article retractions. This go-slow approach had averted scrutiny from the Australian Research Integrity Committee (Aric), which can only examine cases on request within 12 weeks after universities’ internal investigations had formally ended.

Vaux said institutions could take “as long as they like” over these investigations. He said university administrators had realised that they could “prevent review by Aric” – and consequently save face and preserve grant earnings of “star” researchers – by slowing down investigations, arbitrarily dismissing cases or reclassifying wrongdoing as “academic misconduct”.

“Denying or covering up concerns protects reputations and maintains funding,” Vaux said, in a submission to the Senate Education and Employment Committee’s university governance inquiry.

黑料吃瓜网

Vaux is former deputy director of the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research and director of?Retraction Watch’s parent organisation, the Center for Scientific Integrity. He had a ?launched?in his honour by the Australian Academy of Science in 2023. He said research integrity was a “core governance issue” and university leaders who failed to uphold it were failing their staff, students and public.

?Campus spotlight guide: Understanding and protecting academic integrity

?Vaux has long advocated the establishment of a national office or ombudsman for research integrity to bring Australia in line with most European nations, the US, Canada, Japan and China. He said Aric was a poor substitute because it could not consider the merit of research misconduct allegations.

黑料吃瓜网

Its scope was limited to reviewing institutional processes to deal with the allegations, and only if they involved research funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) or Australian Research Council (ARC).

“Its findings and recommendations are usually kept secret, even from those who requested the review,” the submission says. “Aric makes recommendations to the CEOs of the ARC or NHMRC, but the CEOs are not obliged to follow Aric’s recommendations, and not uncommonly, have chosen not to do so.”

His submission cites a 2024 by the federal auditor general’s office, which found that far from conducting its own fraud investigations, the NHMRC neither oversaw nor gained assurances about investigations conducted by its funding recipients.

The NHMRC said it had subsequently revised its misconduct policy to require recipients to report fraud allegations and ensure that investigations were undertaken by “suitably qualified personnel”. An ARC spokesperson said Aric’s processes were “designed to ensure transparency and accountability, with mechanisms in place to address concerns about timeliness and confidentiality”.?

黑料吃瓜网

Vaux’s submission cites unresolved allegations of doctored research, some dating back as far as 2009. In involving researchers from UNSW Sydney and Macquarie University, he said there had been no independent investigation of allegations raised in September 2021.

Macquarie said it had conducted an “impartial investigation” of the allegations against its academics, and requested “corrective actions” including “corrigenda or retractions where appropriate”. UNSW said its initial investigation had uncovered misrepresentations that “warranted further investigation” by an independent inquiry panel. “The matter is still being investigated and remains confidential.”

In involving the University of Newcastle, Vaux said no action had been taken regarding cancer research concerns raised in June 2024. Newcastle said it was “reviewing” the concerns and could not comment “until the review is complete”.

Vaux’s submission also cites UNSW’s , which detail almost 400 allegations between 2021 and 2023. The reports mention no independent investigations, although UNSW submitted to an independent review of its processes.

黑料吃瓜网

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com