Crown Research Institutes to be merged: Science sector revamp draws mixed reaction

New Zealand Association of Scientists Co-President says the Crown Research Institutes merger announced today “will do little to address the concerns of researchers and scientists”.

The Crown Research Institutes will become three mega science organisations – “Public Research Organisations” (PROs) – with a fourth established to focus on “advanced technology”.

The changes come after consideration of the long-awaited Science System Advisory Group’s (SSAG) first report by Sir Peter Gluckman.

Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Judith Collins, who will hand the science portfolio to Shane Reti tomorrow, says the reforms will mark the largest reset of New Zealand’s science system in more than 30 years.

“The changes that are announced today are extensive but they will ensure a system that generates maximum value for the economy and therefore for all New Zealanders.”

She said the current Crown Research Institute chairpeople had already been looking at staffing and downsizing, and were all supportive of the move.

“They’ve been knowing that they are going to have to right-size and they knew that there was change coming, so much so that every one of the Crown Research Institute chairs is supportive of what we’re doing.

“They’re excited about this.”

But Dr Lucy Stewart is not convinced.

“It is entirely focused on commercialisation and commercial benefits from science and technology,” she said.

She also pointed out the lack of announcement over funding for local research, and that said it will see the end of the only government institution that was focused on advanced technology.

She said the message from the government to scientists was clear.

“They are expected to be a source of revenue rather than working for the public good, and anything they do that isn’t directly linked to economic gain is of little interest.

“It is also fairly incredible for the government to assert that we need to attract more ‘skilled individuals’ to New Zealand when we know researchers are being made redundant and leaving the country in large numbers due to this government’s actions.”

But for Professor Nicola Gaston, her concerns are more focused on the implementation, rather than the government’s intent.

“The prospect of consolidating the CRIs has long been mooted,” she said. “Creating a fourth to focus on technological areas of importance to emerging areas of the modern economy – such as cleantech, or quantum tech – is also welcome in principle.

“In practice, it reverses the decision to disestablish Industrial Research Limited that was made by the previous National government when it created Callaghan Innovation.”

Professor Gaston, who is also director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, said it should be noted that much of the existing scientific capacity in areas relevant to the new PRO in advanced technologies is currently based in the university sector.

“How is this expected to work? Partnerships will be important, but if new money is not put into the system, then it will be hard to grow capacity and capability.”

Professor Gaston stressed that the process of reorganisation takes work, and the work done by scientists within the sector to adjust will have a cost in time not spent on science.

She said this would be a lot to ask given the cuts made to both university and CRI workforces over the last couple of years.

The mooted reforms can work, but there are necessary conditions for that to happen, she said.

“More resource for the sector to assist with the costs of implementation, and a commitment from policy makers to work with scientists in order to ensure these changes can be implemented as efficiently as possible.

“I implore this government and MBIE to understand that the real work starts now and with us.”

Dr Sereana Naepi, who is an associate professor of sociology at University of Auckland and Rutherford Discovery Fellow, said the concerns raised by SSAG (Science Sector Advisory Group) about Māori and Pacific workforce futures and demographic shifts were largely unaddressed.

“I remain hopeful that future announcements will address these gaps and ensure more inclusive workforce planning for a resilient SI&T sector.

“There are opportunities to do this, for instance how can the public research organisations focused on Advanced Technology collaborate with the Ministry for Pacific Peoples to fulfil aspirations for greater Pacific representation in the SI&T sector?”

Dr Naepi said the Prime Minister’s Science, Innovation, and Technology Council presents a unique opportunity to strategically address the retention of top talent in New Zealand.

She said they have the opportunity to establish a comprehensive National Early Career Researcher Plan that could tackle not only the challenges of today but also future demographic and qualification shifts.

She said this would ensure sustained excellence in the Science, Innovation, and Technology (SI&T) sector.

“Economic growth is the anchoring argument for this rethink – it is crucial to adopt a broad economic perspective.

“Poor social cohesion can negatively impact economic stability, which underscores the importance of addressing how the SI&T sector can adapt to increasing environmental, resource, and equity challenges while fostering societal harmony.”

Meanwhile, professor Michael Baker said he was pleased to see that the reform included retention of a public research organisation (PRO) with a focus on health.

“Based on the limited information released so far, it is not clear whether its role will be very different to the current crown research institute (CRI) Environmental Science and Research (ESR) that it replaces.

“Retaining this focused role indicates good support for the critical role that science plays in protecting health and the quality of our environment.

“This role was well demonstrated by New Zealand’s highly effective response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The importance of building and maintaining public health science capabilities and capacity was strongly supported by the recently released Royal Commission of Inquiry Report into our Covid-19 response.”

He said it is also important to remember that that improving health, wellbeing, and equity has economic value.

Decision on future welcomed

Plant and Food Research chief executive Mark Piper said it was great to finally have a decision on the future of the research institutes, despite his job being on the line.

The major shakeup will see Plant and Food Research, AgResearch, Landcare Research, and Scion under new Bioeconomy agency.

Piper said the changes should help the organisations collaborate and focus on the big ticket items and says while economies of scale should help drive efficiency, cuts and reducing costs were not the main drivers of the reforms.

“But it’s quite obvious that you won’t need four CEOs.”

He said the fact that some questions remain unanswered means the organisations will have input into what the new entities will look like and there is an appetite to get started as soon as possible.

“We want our people to have certainty, I’d like to have certainty myself and just move on and focus on the future.

“Go as fast as you can but no faster, but we do need to move with a bit pace now that it’s public.”

RNZ understands weekly meetings with senior CRI leaders to discuss how the organisations will be consolidated are due to start next week.

The changes will also see the disestablishment of the Callaghan Innovation, with its functions moved to other entities.

Collins said it had simply been spread too thinly across too many functions, “leading to poor financial performance and an over-reliance on Crown funding”.

Callaghan Innovation said it would support staff and customers through the disestablishment.

“I am incredibly proud of the contribution Callaghan Innovation has made to the science, innovation and technology ecosystem over the last 12 years,” chief executive Stefan Korn said.

“Callaghan Innovation staff bring deep knowledge and dedication to their work every day. First and foremost, I would like to thank our people for all that they do to foster innovation and commercialise world-class science in New Zealand.”

“I know the Callaghan Innovation team will bring that same level of professionalism to managing the wind up of the organisation and the transition to the reshaped science and innovation system the government has announced today.”

He said it will take months to work through the disestablishment of Callaghan Innovation and that change will happen at pace.

Collins said the government had rejected a science system advisory group recommendation to merge all the CRIs into a single body.

“Because we know that people like to have a bit of competition, they like to be able to benchmark themselves against others, and we think it’s a much better opportunity for them to be able to work together and to get some of those right-sizing.”

Labour leader Chris Hipkins said one of the first things the government had done was cut the $500m in capital that had been allocated for the science sector, and reorganisation of the CRIs was being worked on under Labour.

He said the government “suddenly seems to have discovered science” as the answer to the country’s problems, “despite the fact that 350 jobs were cut from the science sector last year under Christopher Luxon’s watch, and he did nothing about it.

“The role of chief science advisor seems to have been disestablished under Christopher Luxon though he doesn’t seem to have made any announcements about that.

“This is a government that’s basically trying to create distraction that the economy is shrinking under their watch. If disestablishing Callaghan innovation is going to be the answer, was John Key wrong when he established it?”

Hipkins said if the government were really serious, they would have announced additional investing, but instead are “cutting funding for science.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

This post was originally published on here