Opinion
A notable exclusion
Consultation
At an early juncture this thesis addresses what is not in scope. Central to that consideration is that the review is bounded by the RSI Ministerial vote, that is, to the public-funded research infrastructure, primarily the Crown Research Institutes and the research components of Callaghan Innovation. Thus the university research system, as funded through the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC), is out of bounds. Accepting the convenience of the boundaries of ministerial budget vote to define boundaries, this limitation assumes an erroneous construct that universities are predominantly about education. That overlooks a point made in the cabinet paper4, but not in this green paper, which observed that there had been a significant shift in the institutions performing publicly-funded research since the CRI’s were established in 1992. Prior to the formation of the CRI entities, research at educational institutions (primarily universities) was funded at about two-thirds the amount of crown-owned research institutions. In parallel with Government research funding growth (increasing by around 75% since 2010) the balance in funding has also shifted such that universities now receive 25% more public research funding than do CRI’s. So it seems irrational to analyse a science research “system” but ignore the largest component of that system.
Back in 2019 government set a goal6 to raise R&D expenditure from the 1.3% recorded in 2017 to two per cent of GDP by 2027. This Green Paper is the next step in the Government’s effort to make that happen, with this exercise focusing on improving the publicly funded science infrastructure. It is a brave initiative, but not as brave as it would have been had the scope extended to the entirety of the national research science and innovation system.
A functioning system operates as a unitary whole and not as a mélange of its subsidiary parts. So if the Government’s true intent is to provide a review of an operational science system it would require that the entirety of that system be included in its evaluation. To do otherwise invites erroneous conclusions and inappropriate responses. As the Government’s own RSI strategy document5 observed in 2019, “Our (research) system consists of around 20,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers (not including students), around 4,000 R&D performing businesses (with many more reporting innovation), eight Universities, seven Crown Research Institutes (CRIs), and many independent research organisations, business accelerators and incubators, and other support functions.” To isolate a relatively small portion of that complex system for detached scrutiny in the guise of a system review is like a doctor performing a health check-up by intensively studying the patient’s right hand. Far better that government mimic the approach it seeks to encourage in the research system and conduct a cross-ministry collaboration to diagnose the entire patient that is the NZ RSI system.
Establishing focus A further key plank of the paper is to consider an approach of directing funding through mid- to long-term national priorities with these collective areas identifying where research (in its broad guise) offers substantial future impact on New Zealand’s well-being – social, economic and environmental. This approach is intended to bring focus, purpose and funding stability along with greater impact. An analogy is drawn with the current National Science Challenges (NSC’s) where cross-system collaboration is deemed to have been substantially enhanced by providing a challenging but clear mission to be collectively accomplished. Like the NSC’s, the green paper suggests that each research priority would have a discrete dedicated funding allocation. To exemplify the characteristics of themes intended to be prioritised the paper suggests Climate Change, Infectious Diseases, Fresh water, Food and Advanced Manufacturing as potential priority science platforms. In short these are big grunty matters with deep and substantial impact. Within the context of prioritisation the paper observes that research priorities could focus on a problem (e.g., pollution), an opportunity (e.g., alternative proteins), a technology (e.g., CRISPR), a mission (e.g., space) or a field of research (e.g., soil science). Many who read those words will infer that this approach is one step too close to the government “picking winners”, a taboo long out-of-bounds for government intervention.
This consultation initiates a multi-year review and response programme. Written submissions on this Green Paper will be open until 02 March, 2022 with a set of in-depth workshops slated for early 2022 to inform respondents. From there, Cabinet will determine the options for further consideration for implementation based on written submissions to the paper. That will trigger another consultation round to enhance the detail of preferred options. Only after that process will an implementation plan be effected. Ministers Woods and Verrall jointly encourage all who engage with the RSI system, whether in performance of, or reliance on research activities, to provide their input to the review. There are many questions posed in need of well-informed deliberations that are best framed from the ground up. Perhaps you can take the paper on summer holiday with you and provide your insights from a more relaxed frame of mind!
References 1. NZ Government Green Paper, October 28, 2021: “ Te Ara Paerangi – Future Pathways Green Paper 2021” (available at https://www.mbie. govt.nz/dmsdocument/17637-future-pathways-green-paper accessed 20/11/2021) 2. Government Press Release, October 28, 2021: “30-year-old RSI system to modernise” (available at https://www.beehive.govt.nz/ release/30-year-old-rsi-system-modernise accessed 20/11/2021) 3. Report of the Crown Research Institute Taskforce, February 2010: “How to enhance the value of New Zealand’s investment in Crown Research Institutes” (available at https://www.mbie.govt. nz/assets/7502750043/how-to-enhance-the-value-report-of-the-critaskforce.pdf accessed 22/11/2021) 4. MBIE Cabinet Paper, 28 October, 2021: “Future Pathways for the Research, Science and Innovation System” (available at https:// www.mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/17664-future-pathways-for-theresearch-science-and-innovation-system-proactiverelease-pdf accessed 20/11/2021) 5. NZ Government Consultation Paper, September 2019: “New Zealand’s Research, Science & Innovation Strategy” (available at https://www. mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/6935-new-zealands-research-scienceand-innovation-strategy-draft-for-consultation accessed 22/11/2021) 6. NZ Government Press Release, 1 March 2019: “R&D rising but greater acceleration needed” (available at https://www.beehive.govt. nz/release/rd-rising-greater-acceleration-needed accessed 22/11/2021)
Declaration of interest: While the author has written this article in his capacity as an independent consultant Food Technologist, in the interests of full disclosure he declares that he is employed part-time by the Crown Research Institute Plant & Food Research. The article provides the personal views of the author and should not be attributed to any other party or institution.
December 2021/January 2022
27