Scientists critical of red-tape battle

By KIRAN CHUG - The Dominion Post

Researchers say they are being held back from making scientific breakthroughs by red tape and over-competitive funding systems that pit them against each other.

The New Zealand Association of Scientists has made public a survey showing some scientists feel forced to spend too much time on administration and meeting funding requirements.

The publication of the survey comes as a group set up to review the purpose and performance of the eight Crown Research Institutes prepares to present the Government with possible recommendations for changes to the research landscape.

The institutes are government-owned businesses with different scientific purposes, and as a group have assets worth in excess of $695 million.

Association president James Renwick said the survey – answered by 5966 scientists and technologists – showed it was time for an overhaul of the science system in New Zealand, and the situation was critical.

He believed it was possible the research institutes would merge in the future, as their current structure prevented scientists from sharing knowledge and working together.

Crown Research Institutes were set up as businesses whose staff competed for funding, Dr Renwick said.

"There's a strong emphasis on the bottom line. That has hampered science in New Zealand because it discourages collaboration."

Research, Science and Technology Minister Wayne Mapp has said previously that a task force had been set up to examine the purpose, governance and funding of the institutes.

They were required to play a "central role" in lifting New Zealand's economic performance but, as they were established in 1992, it was time to revisit their purpose and how they worked.

"They must be delivering on national priorities and responding to the needs of research users, particularly industry and businesses."

The task force was due to report back with recommendations to Dr Mapp next week.

Dr Renwick said there was a risk of "superficial patch-up solutions" unless a robust review of what CRIs did and how well they worked had been completed.

The survey shows that more scientists working for CRIs than those at universities believe their work is held up by micro-managers requiring reports proving that their funding is warranted.

About two in five scientists spend more than 30 per cent of their time on administration and compliance instead of research.

Dr Renwick said there was also a lack of faith that original ideas would attract funding, and only a quarter would recommend science as a career.

However, David Bibby, dean of Victoria University's science faculty, said higher numbers of students than ever were seeking careers in science.

The numbers of students enrolling for postgraduate scientific research had increased by 250 per cent in the past five years, he said.

WHAT THE RESEARCHERS SAY

* Forty per cent believe the Government should reconsider its prohibition of nuclear power sources.

* Forty-six per cent believe the Government should invest as much in research on organic foods as in genetically engineered foods.

* Twelve per cent believe GM research should be suspended because it threatens the ecosystem.

* Nearly half of those questioned say funding reviews are marred by cronysim, old boys' networks and insider politics, with non-mainstream ideas unlikely to receive funding.

* Interruptions in funding, followed by bureaucratic accountability and red tape, are the biggest problems facing scientists.

* Seventy per cent believe humans are the main cause of global warming.

* Only a quarter of Crown Research Institute scientists questioned would recommend science as a career.