Almost 300 scientists from government science institutions, universities and independent research organisations have condemned the way in which the Government’s National Science Challenges are being rolled out. They also are questioning the potential of the challenges to deliver benefit to New Zealand, according to a recent poll run by the New Zealand Association of Scientists.
The results, published on the NZAS website, contradict ministerial assurances that there are no problems with the challenges process.
NZAS President Nicola Gaston, in a media statement, said the sad thing about the survey responses was how disengaged scientists had become from the process.
“The good news, however, is that scientists in New Zealand feel a clear responsibility to ensure that taxpayers money is spent well, and they are prepared to speak up despite concerns that the new money being put into the Challenges could yet be taken away.
Gaston said she was struck by the remarkable consistency of the responses, which provided broadly similar criticisms by involvement, age, or institution type of the respondent.
“Many of the respondents were greatly concerned by the lack of transparency in the process and some had the perception that the NSCs had been captured by a small number of senior scientists”. A sample breakdown of the questions is appended.
The Government has proposed ten challenges that will eventually assimilate about half of the total science investment by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Three challenges have already been launched – High Value Nutrition, Science for Society and Deep South.
Problems have been indicated with many of the proposed challenges, but the lack of transparency of the process makes it hard to judge progress, Gaston said.
Another key criticism by scientists is that new bureaucracies are being established to run each challenge, leading to an unacceptable growth in overheads across the science system.
The NZ Association of Scientists is urging the Minister, Steven Joyce, to take these concerns seriously and launch an independent review of the entire NSC process, led by international science experts.
This review should consider the opportunity cost of repurposing the allocated NSC funding into alternative existing science funding mechanisms within NZ such as the Marsden Fund, the Health Research Council, and the MBIE contestable round.