Science and New Zealand's Future: Reflections from the Transit of Venus Forum
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Science and New Zealand’s Future:
Reflections from the Transit of
Venus Forum
Office of the Prime Minister’s Science Advisory Committee
PO Box 108-117, Symonds Street, Auckland 1150, New Zealand A report to the Prime Minister from
Telephone +64 9 923 1788
Website: www.pmcsa.org.nz
Sir Peter Gluckman
Email: csa@pmcsa.org.nz
Report prepared August 2012
OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ISBN 978-0-477-10384-8 (paperback)
ISBN 978-0-477-10385-5 (PDF)Science and New Zealand’s Future
Introduction the hunger, and indeed passion, many New Zea-
On June 7 and 8th 2012, over 250 New Zealanders landers have for New Zealand to be more ambi-
including leaders from government agencies, local tious in its use of science and scholarship. There
bodies, science organisations, academia, business, was clear recognition that science and scholarship
iwi and NGOs, as well as successful locally and in- have critical and greater roles to play in advancing
ternationally based Kiwi entrepreneurs and many New Zealand economically, in moving our society
young people, gathered in Gisborne for a Forum to towards greater social cohesion, and in protecting
discuss how New Zealand could better use science our environment – and yet doing so within a broad
to advance economically, environmentally and range of constraints. And science promotes New
socially. Zealand’s place in the world.
The Forum was conceived of by the late Sir Paul While it was acknowledged that some significant
Callaghan. He saw it as a way to commemorate steps in the right direction had been made in recent
the many scientific associations underlying James years, there was an essentially unanimous view
Cook’s arrival in New Zealand in 1769. that a more cohesive and aggressive approach was
needed if New Zealand is to make best use of its
Because of his terminal illness, Sir Paul asked me latent capacities in the pursuit of such national but
to take over the leadership of the Forum. Paul realistic aspirations.
and I made the decision that the focus of the Fo-
rum should not be on a discussion of where New At the same time, it was agreed that difficult is-
Zealand wants to go, as that is generally agreed sues in moving New Zealand ahead should not be
by most New Zealanders (albeit with different avoided or consigned to being adjudicated on the
emphases), but rather how science can accelerate basis of rhetoric alone, and were therefore can-
us down the collectively acknowledged path. As I vassed. These matters included the complex sub-
stated in my opening remarks … jects of technology assessment, risk management,
how trade-offs are to be managed, how the tail
“The question which we came together for, at of educational disadvantage for many New Zea-
the inspiration of Paul, was how can science, landers might be remedied, and addressing those
the power of the mind and scholarship help structural and operational limitations still occur-
make this country achieve some generally held ring both within the science system and within the
goals, economic prosperity, a high standard innovation system (these are not the same).
of living for all, greater social cohesion and
achieving that necessary economic growth
without harm to our environment.”
“New Zealand is at last starting
to move beyond its traditionally
Captain James Cook’s voyage to the South Pacific
somewhat hesitant approach to
had been sponsored by the Royal Society of Lon-
don as part of an 18th century international scien- the use of science, scholarship and
tific collaboration to observe the Transit of Venus. intellectualism.”
He did this successfully in Tahiti and thereafter
under sealed Admiralty instructions sailed south in The overwhelming sense of the meeting was that
search of the legendary great southern continent. New Zealand is at last starting to move beyond its
Following an initial landing in Gisborne that was traditionally somewhat hesitant approach to the
fraught with misunderstandings, Cook then landed use of science, scholarship and intellectualism.
at Uawa (Tolaga Bay) where the first amicable and With this, there is an energy and capacity that can
constructive dialogue between Māori and Pakeha be harnessed to advance New Zealand more rap-
occurred. It was therefore highly appropriate that, idly and effectively, particularly in the economic
on the day prior to the Forum, its participants domain, thereby empowering the nation’s capacity
gathered with many others in Tolaga Bay/Uawa to improve social conditions and better protect the
to observe the latest transit of Venus and the last country’s unique environment. Science offers the
that will be observed for more than a century. The fundamental capacity to work objectively through
enthusiasm of the people, both young and old, of some of the complex trade-offs that all countries
Te Aitanga-a-Hauiti to engage with the Forum par- face when navigating the demand for growth and
ticipants was palpable and invigorating. social expectations on one hand and environmen-
The nature of the constructive and committed tal protection and constraints on the other. A more
dialogue at the Forum itself was an illustration of mature and robust approach to technology and
Page 1Science and New Zealand’s Future
risk assessment and its application is called for – their use? How should we move from a rather
one based on knowledge rather than simply gut limited understanding of new technologies when
reaction and rhetoric. there is often accidental or even intentional con-
The Forum comprised many different voices; it was fusion between science on one hand and politics,
constructive and highly collegial but at the same values and philosophies on the other? And in what
time was made up of a series of frank conversa- ways can knowledge and scholarship play a much
tions. Naturally there were some diverse views stronger role in our society?
and, at times, advocacy for particular positions. At the Forum there was overwhelming support for
Nevertheless, the desired sense of direction con- the centrality of science and scholarship as a strat-
sistently emerged. There was a clear view that egy for advancing New Zealand. There was a strong
within Māori and Pasifika communities there re- view that New Zealand had failed to adequately
mains a great deal of latent and actual innovative grasp the opportunities that science and scholar-
potential to be unleashed. ship offer. It was noted that over some decades
most other small advanced nations had invested
“There was a clear view that within significantly more in science and had done so in
Māori and Pasifika communities a more holistic way. This higher public investment
there remains a great deal of latent in R&D in other countries had been paralleled and
and actual innovative potential to be then exceeded by increased private sector invest-
unleashed.”
“At the Forum there was overwhelming
The Forum consisted of an opening address by support for the centrality of science
myself1 followed by six sessions, each with four to
six presentations by invited speakers followed by
and scholarship as a strategy for
extensive dialogue with the participants. The ses- advancing
sions were on prosperity, resource management, New Zealand ...”
the environment, a Māori perspective on innova-
tion, our people, and New Zealand’s place in the ment. This has seen dividends coming to these
world. I then summarised the meeting. In parallel countries in terms of their economic development
there were several public panel discussions con- and international standing. The New Zealand situ-
vened by Ms Kim Hill, and there was considerable ation is complicated by the nature of our business
web-based interaction. It is not my intent to sum- mix, the lack of multinationals and our isolation,
marise the proceedings session by session, rather but we should expect dividends from greater pub-
I shall identify the major themes and conclusions lic and private investment in R&D.
reached2. A number of systematic and organisational limita-
This report reflects my own personal summary and tions for using science optimally in New Zealand
interpretation of the meeting. It is also inevitably were identified by participants, who presented
influenced by other recent dialogues I have been their arguments in a constructive spirit. The view
part of, including meetings with the Chairs of Eu- was strongly put and agreed that generally there
ropean Science and Innovation Advisory Councils must be a more complete perspective on how sci-
and other chief scientists, particularly those from ence contributes to New Zealand’s development.
other small advanced countries. There has been a strong and very focused belief in
the utilitarian role of science in providing the sub-
Overall impressions strate for economic innovation. In itself this is true
and should be reinforced, but not at the expense
Fundamentally, the Forum was addressing a group of a broader commitment to the many other ways
of challenges – how does one balance economic that science contributes to advancing New Zea-
growth and resource use versus resource conser- land. Indeed, some of these areas have received
vation, what trade-offs are involved, how can we minimal focus over some decades.
use technologies well and when should we limit
While the tone of the meeting was very positive
1 Available at www.pmcsa.org.nz. and enthusiastic and acknowledged that your
2 The full proceedings of the Forum are available at government had made important steps to address
http://www.royalsociety.org.nz/events/2012-transit-of- this deficit, it was felt that greater attention to the
venus-Forum-lifting-our-horizon/Forum-programme/. broader uses of science was desirable if New Zea-
Page 2Science and New Zealand’s Future
land was to fulfil the ambitions that we all have for We discussed how countries look at themselves.
this country. As he said so pithily, “Finland has start-up envy,
Israel has Nokia-envy”. His point was that every
Strengths and weaknesses country must develop its own path to innovation
We are a small and geographically remote nation. and must build on what they are excellent at – yet
We are multicultural and both emotionally and all nations are good at taking for granted what they
economically we increasingly see ourselves as part are best at rather than using that to build on and
of the Asia-Pacific. We tend to be complacent – create excellence. We all can feel resonance with
selling food and tourism has been relatively easy, this statement – we need to find our own path.
but worryingly, exports as a percentage of our One of the negatives that was discussed is that
economy have stagnated over some years. As a we tend to look at ourselves introspectively: we
nation we have been relatively satisfied with our- need to deal with our sometimes choking internal
selves and not as ambitious as we need to be in parochialism, we need to become cleverer at self-
diagnosis, but intellectuals thinking in isolation
“It is not realistic to imagine that we will have little impact. There is a need for informed
can achieve as a small nation the and inclusive public discussion. As one of the
kind of growth we need by looking participants said, “Serious countries treat ideas
inwardly.” seriously”. Our debates are often superficial and
ill-informed – often entirely emotive with neither
knowledge nor consideration of the fact that every
order to thrive despite the inevitable challenges, decision involves implicit or explicit trade-offs.
including those of rearrangements of the global
economy over the coming decades. It is not realis- “Serious countries treat ideas
tic to imagine that we can achieve as a small nation
the kind of growth we need by looking inwardly.
seriously.”
We need to be better at looking at ourselves and
Scale is a major issue in innovation. Innovative
at learning from and linking to the changing world.
knowledge appears most often at the frontiers of
When one scans the globe, many of the most suc- disciplines interacting with other disciplines. Good
cessful high-income countries (at least in economic evidence has emerged from analysis that larger
terms) over the past decade have been small coun- cities and clusters are the most innovative. Thus,
tries. Countries like Denmark, Singapore, Korea, several speakers pointed out the need to build
Israel and Finland have all managed to withstand Auckland to scale, the need to encourage greater
the economic storm better than most – and they differentiation among our tertiary institutions and
have done so on the basis of becoming knowledge- reduce their focus on internal competition and
intensive economies. Several consistent themes thus a trend to become somewhat homogeneous,
emerge. and the need to enhance greater connectedness
It is clear that smallness does indeed drive a cul- in the science and innovation sectors across the
ture of doing more with less (although there is a country. It is probably to our disadvantage that
limit to that concept) and that while we might not our businesses are themselves more individualistic
often think we do it well, technology transfer tends than in many other comparable countries, with
to be more efficient in small countries. Smallness our SMEs tending to be smaller.
forces small countries (and companies) to focus A challenge for New Zealand will always be to
on thinking globally – they fail if they do not. This maintain its relevance. Our relationship with
raises the question: should we be partnering more much of the world is not equal. Thus our reputa-
with the other small countries? All said and done, tion and ability to contribute disproportionately in
good teams are made by marrying different skills, some areas where we can deliver is important. It
and some places such as Singapore have capacities is therefore imperative to understand how others
and capabilities that we do not have. see us. ‘Clean and green’ serves us well in some
Parenthetically one of my more interesting conver- quarters. But we are well ‘off the radar’ in terms of
sations recently was with Saul Singer, one of the being viewed as an innovative and R&D intensive
authors of Start-Up Nation – the book that docu- nation, and in Asia that really counts against us.
ments and explains Israel’s rapid emergence as the Innovative countries want to associate with other
hot-house of knowledge-based start-up activity. innovative countries. Indeed, we have lost our past
Page 3Science and New Zealand’s Future
reputation as a test bed of innovation, and that has stand the need to be part of the innovation soci-
had costs. ety, and they understand the need to marry the
One cost is that we have lost the interest of mul- well-established western tradition of knowledge
tinational corporations. An innovation ecosystem generation with the strengths of their own cultural
needs such corporations and the lack of them here identity, whether drawn from contemporary ex-
counts against us. How do we rebuild our reputa- perience or traditional knowledge. There may be
tion as a laboratory for innovation and attract challenges in integrating Tikanga Māori into areas
those players? of technology adoption (and vice versa), but with
better dialogue we should be able to turn this mar-
But we have many strengths that must be built riage into a strength.
upon.
New Zealand is small enough to be nimble and The nature of science
be more inclusive in the use of science as a part
Science is not just a collection of facts – rather it is
of policy development; indeed, there has been
a particular way of observing the natural and built
significant political commitment in recent years to
world so as to gain a better understanding of it. It
this strategy.
is wrong to assume that science is about certainty,
We are strongly conscious and proud of our envi- for in most of science certainty is not possible;
ronment, and ‘clean and green’ is a strong brand rather, it is largely about reducing uncertainty. But
that sells in consumer-focused markets. But in science, both formal and informal, remains the
other markets, New Zealand’s reputation as cor- only process we have to gather reliable informa-
ruption free is the key value proposition. We need tion about our world on any scale and from any
to be clear about our strategy market by market perspective. To reject this is to reject the very basis
– in many markets, the concept of sustainability is of logical assessment of the challenges we face.
gaining value rapidly, but in a world of food, wa-
ter and energy insecurity, continuity and safety The one dimension of science that needs to be
of supply remains the primary concern for many. protected at all costs is the need for the collection
The challenge will remain of how to balance and
indeed integrate these concepts.
“The one dimension of science that
needs to be protected at all costs
In general we have a good education system in the
science, technology, engineering and mathematics
is the need for the collection and
(STEM) subjects at secondary school, albeit with interpretation of data to be value-
a long tail of under-achievement. But we need free.”
to think through how to take advantage of new
technologies to enhance STEM education and sci- and interpretation of data to be value-free. Such
ence literacy and to disseminate them. There are freedom from bias is not easy and processes such
a number of issues at the secondary-tertiary inter- as peer review have been developed to provide
face that were identified and need addressing. protection and correction. But while this formal
We are a diverse population, and through that face of science is often presented as a western
diversity should come opportunities for more in- tradition that gained impetus after the Enlight-
novation. There is growing experimental evidence, enment, observation and experiment have their
supported by what we saw at Uawa, suggesting presence in every culture. But it is where the
boundaries between what is observed and what is
“We need to be prepared to believed become blurred that confusion appears
experiment more to address and that can lead to real problems.
educational disadvantage.” We are in danger of underestimating how much the
nature of science has changed over recent decades.
that we can undoubtedly create culturally in- While it used to be focused on linear questions,
formed initiatives that turn the weaknesses of the those aimed for reductionist precision, much sci-
long tail of under-achievement into success. We ence has undergone radical change particularly as
need to be prepared to experiment more to ad- the biological, environmental and human sciences
dress educational disadvantage. have come to dominate. Science now deals with
The innovative potential of the Māori community complex non-linear phenomena where certainty is
is sadly underestimated. Māori themselves under- not possible, where there remain many unknowns
Page 4Science and New Zealand’s Future
and answers are defined in terms of probabilities tists get drawn into such debates, they can turn
and levels of uncertainty. into advocates and risk loss of public trust.
But much complex science has another dimension. But this discussion assumes that science, scholar-
It involves the values dimension. Typical examples ship and intellectualism are well connected to
include food security, the use of genetic modifi- society. In fact some of the main conclusions of
cation, dealing with adolescence or the ageing the Forum were that in New Zealand science is not
population and climate change. These are issues of well connected, either within itself or with society.
high public concern and political complexity. Such The science system per se has become highly frag-
science has been termed ‘post-normal science’ mented by the mix of sometimes ad hoc funding
and can be defined as the application of science systems. There have also been at times inappro-
to public issues where facts are uncertain, values priate expectations of immediate impact coupled
are in dispute, stakes are high and decisions are with problematic institutional arrangements that
urgent. So by their very nature these character- do not allow us to maximally use what capacities
istics mean that science is now intimately linked and capabilities we have in the public science sys-
to and intertwined with the values and concerns tem. We still see enormous divides between the
of the public and body politic. In turn the related scientific disciplines themselves and between the
domain of economics also now has post-normal sciences and the humanities. Regrettably, this is
aspects. The old model of economics based on the in no small part a direct and cumulative result of
presumption that humans always act rationally our funding models, both for individuals and for
in their decision-making has been replaced by a institutions. It is sad that the one area in which
much more complex understanding of how people we should have real advantage as a small country,
make decisions based on biases, emotions and interdisciplinary science, is arguably the most
experience. disadvantaged in both the science and academic
systems.
It is important that we do not put science on a
lofty pedestal that it does not deserve to be on. Scholarship of all forms should be valued. We
stand out amongst advanced countries in not hav-
“... science is part of, not distinct from, ing many places for interaction between academia
and policy, academia and business – there is es-
society.” sentially no rotation between the sectors. And we
have too few public intellectuals. And I was struck
Throughout the Forum it was clear that the partici- by one comment – that we face the tyranny not
pants understood that science is part of, not dis- of distance but of ‘intellectual isolation’; it was
tinct from, society. Science provides some forms noteworthy that even those from within the digi-
of knowledge but societal decisions should be and
are properly made on many other grounds with
“... deliberately invest in an enhanced
strong (but sometimes inadequately examined)
value domains: community values, public opinion, strategy of engagement with policy
fiscal and diplomatic considerations are critical to makers and thinkers overseas.”
policy making. The role of science and scholarship
is to provide the value-free knowledge base and tal world speaking at the Forum saw the need for
options for society to opine on when accommo- New Zealand to deliberately invest in an enhanced
dating the other value-laden dimensions that are strategy of engagement with policy makers and
properly part of democratic decision making. thinkers overseas. Indeed, being more connected
both within ourselves and with the world was a
Because of this intertwining of values with knowl-
major theme of the Forum.
edge, a further complexity arises. Science can
become the proxy for a values or political debate
which is essentially independent of the science. A The types of science
current example is the pseudo-debate about an- One of the consistent ideas throughout the Forum,
thropogenic climate change. While there are real and which is reflected in other conversations, is
knowledge gaps, most of that debate is not really that it is essential that we all understand the full
about the existence of climate change – rather it range of contributions that science and scholar-
being used as a proxy for a values debate about ship should and can make to New Zealand’s devel-
economics and intergenerational equity. As scien- opment. Public science and scholarship, including
Page 5Science and New Zealand’s Future
the humanities and social sciences, have many scientific serendipity and in discovery science
purposes and it is important to have much more as critical and continue to increase their com-
holistic and informed understanding of these. mitment. The international literature makes it
• There is an important cultural component in abundantly clear that there is a very high rate
creating a society that values knowledge and of return on such research.
supports the development of our people, capa-
bilities and capacities. Science and economic growth
• We need research that enhances our national There was vigorous debate about whether eco-
identity, be it to understand our peoples and nomic growth should be judged by dollar value
their history, or our indigenous flora and alone, or whether it should include measures of
fauna, or our environment. We need research human, social and natural capital. The limitations
of the current formulae are well known. Neverthe-
“We need research to understand and less, there was agreement that multi-factor pro-
ductivity growth can occur through imitation (that
best manage our natural resources is by knowledge absorption) or by frontier innova-
for both economic and conservation tion. However, as countries become increasingly
reasons.” technological and get closer to the global knowl-
edge frontiers, the latter has by far the greater im-
to understand and best manage our natural pact on growth. The evidence suggests that while
resources for both economic and conservation knowledge transfer and absorption promotes
reasons. Conservation science is complex and growth in low GDP countries, in high-income coun-
can lead to important but not necessarily intui- tries it is no longer enough to have high absorptive
tive or emotionally-based decisions. Again, we capacity and to be competitive they must also
come back to the issue of trade-offs. have high frontier innovation. Indeed, this applies
• We need to defend our economy, environment to a country like New Zealand, even though it must
and society through research in areas such as be selective, and the challenge becomes one of
biosecurity, the environment and public health. prioritisation.
But how do you value such research? It has im- Several clear messages have emerged from the
mense economic importance but has no direct other advanced small nations. Firstly, it is gener-
rate of return. ally accepted that assessing the return on R&D is a
• We need to improve the effectiveness of public complicated process with long lag-times. Further,
expenditure through better use of health re-
search, social science research and economic
“... assessing the return on R&D is a
research. And the growing use of evidence in complicated process with long lag-
public policy-making was noted. Scientific disci- times.”
plines can be applied to the evaluation of new
and extant programmes. What savings might the linear model of the relationship between
be possible from the public spend if we looked investment in an individual research project and
for effectiveness, assuming that this is the basis private sector developed innovation is now re-
on which we choose to fund? jected in favour of a much more holistic approach.
While it is difficult to measure the direct effects
• We need research to support our trading and of public R&D spend on economic growth, there
diplomatic interests – for example through is a consensus about its importance and ability to
Antarctic research, science to support foreign generate return. In general, estimates of the rate
aid, or to support trade agreements such as of annual return on public investment in R&D are
through biosecurity research. in the order of 20-40%. There is also growing evi-
• We need science to support innovation that dence that public investment does not crowd out
directly feeds through to economic growth. private investment but rather actually fosters it.
But it is important here to understand that While many countries have tried to look at the is-
this requires a full range of science domains, sue of impact and the broader issues of social and
from what is often called discovery science to policy return as well as direct economic return, the
late stage development. Innovative countries, reality is that quantitative assessments are difficult
especially the smaller ones, see investment in and artificial. That does not mean that just because
Page 6Science and New Zealand’s Future
we cannot measure it well we should ignore it – in ensure that the less productive farmers adopt the
a quote attributed to Einstein, “not everything we practices of their most productive counterparts?
can measure is important and not everything that How do we deal with effluent and what would
is important can be measured”. we feed the cows on? Yes, this is likely to involve
A second message that has emerged is that while more grain, more palm kernel and so forth, and
the science and innovation ecosystems intersect, would we need feedlots? And what trade-offs are
they are not the same. Not all innovation comes acceptable? Perhaps technological solutions can
from science and it is clear that not all science be found – a scientific effort in this domain would
is driven by a need to innovate. But without a appear meritorious.
commitment to and a culture of scholarship and I am not advocating for any particular position;
enquiry, innovation of the type that will lead to rather I am using this as a good example of where
economic growth at a scale we need is not achiev- emotion, science and politics interact and yet there
able. While relevance and impact will be core to may be enormous economic opportunity. In a par-
ticipatory democracy such as ours, open discussion
“... without a commitment to and a of such trade-offs is essential. However, this should
culture of scholarship and enquiry, occur in the context of first being informed by sci-
ence of what we know and do not know – often
innovation of the type that will lead to such debates in New Zealand have occurred on the
economic growth at a scale we need is background of polemic rather than knowledge. We
not achievable.” need to distinguish between rejecting a technol-
ogy per se and rejecting a particular application of
research prioritisation, there is an ineluctable that technology. We will face an ever-increasing
need to sustain a high corpus of research for ideas
generation – that indeed is the primary role of uni-
versities in a science and innovation ecosystem. It “We need to distinguish between
is business that has the role of filtering those ideas rejecting a technology per se and
and turning them to products. rejecting a particular application of
There are two key questions in the interplay be- that technology.”
tween the New Zealand science and innovation
systems. Firstly, what is it that we are doing well number of new technologies where we must have
now that we could do more of? Secondly, what is such informed conversations.
it we are not doing much of but where we have a And what are we not doing well now where we
clear competitive advantage? We will not get rich have a competitive advantage? Given the qual-
from our small internal market, but only by increas- ity of our STEM education we have advantages in
ing sales to the ever-increasingly inter-dependent areas such as high value manufacturing, science
world. based services and the digital economy, and the
The answers are not easily arrived at because government has made important commitments
whatever we do there are trade-offs – risks that in this direction recently. Indeed, this is already a
have to be evaluated and managed. One example particularly rapidly growing part of our economy.
suffices to make some points. In theory we could
add at least $15 billion dollars per annum to our Trade-offs
national income by selling more milk – and do The discussion of ‘trade-offs’ featured frequently
so without adding one more cow to our national in the Forum. The reality was generally accepted
herd. The genetic improvements we have made that everything we do involves trade-offs. Sus-
to date in our cows mean that if they could be taining 40% more people on the planet, many of
fed to their biological potential we would double whom rightly demand far better living standards,
or triple our milk production, and we know how will involve more energy and food consumption
to sell milk. We could increase the value further, and more resource use – there is no way around
but more slowly, by developing value-added prod- that. How do we do that while protecting a planet
ucts such as foods with proven health-enhancing we have increasingly come to value and see at
properties. All we have to do is feed and care for risk? I suspect that rich societies are undergoing a
the cows differently. But now come the trade-offs fundamental shift in their attitude to the environ-
and thus the constraints and issues – how do we ment, not dissimilar to the shift that happened in
Page 7Science and New Zealand’s Future
western societies beginning about 200 years ago in Science literacy
how people considered other human beings – we There is no challenge that we will face over coming
abandoned slavery and the beginnings of social decades that does not depend on science. It will be
concern and welfare appeared. In my view, too critical to our economic, our environmental, our
much of the national conversation has been trite in social and our cultural development. And this does
imagining that these trade-offs can be avoided – a not just mean science in the laboratory or field
much more sophisticated discussion is needed and setting; science has a critical role to play in public
science and technology will be essential to finding dialogue as we develop a national consensus on
appropriate solutions. how best to manage trade-offs. It also can have a
Indeed, one of the surprising things to me at the far fuller role to play in dealing with many complex
Forum was the problem of language and the un- policy areas such as health, education and social
willingness of some to get beyond vision and rhet- welfare. And science can help in finding ways to
oric to the hard realities. Some wanted to avoid use resources more efficiently – be it fresh water
the use of the word ‘trade-offs’ and preferred for irrigation or fuel for transport, heating and en-
to talk about ‘balance’ or ‘equilibrium’. Others ergy, it is win/win for both the economy and the
wanted to talk about ‘ecosystems’ in a very generic environment if we can improve productivity while
way – talking about the health of the New Zealand consuming such resources more efficiently.
ecosystem means everything from environment to All of this requires a much more scientifically
economy. But I think the discussion allowed most aware, literate and engaged population. This will
participants to come to understand that these are be essential if a participatory democracy such as
all actually ways of saying the same thing. All deci- ours is to find its way through the opportunities
sions involve a trade-off at some level and unless and threats associated with existing challenges and
more resources are added to a system, then more
difficult trade-offs become inevitable. “... how do we begin to make a more
My view is that some at the Forum wished to avoid scientifically engaged and literate
the word ‘trade-off’ because emotionally it is population, both public and policy-
harder to accept the realities it implies than saying maker?”
“... trade-offs are real at every level the rapid changes that technology brings. Thus an-
other constant theme throughout the Forum was
from the planetary to the individual.” that of how do we begin to make a more scientifi-
cally engaged and literate population, both public
balance or equilibrium. But trade-offs are real at and policy-maker? For the point remains that,
every level from the planetary to the individual. In relative to other small countries, we are behind in
our own lives we prioritise – nearly all of us will making the switch to a knowledge-based economy
prioritise our family and household economy over and society. As a result, we have a relatively high
the environment no matter how much we value it. level of dissonance between what we know and
While one does not have to be rich to value the what we believe.
environment, it helps, which is why a focus on
environmental protection generally rises as econo- Technology and risk
mies become wealthier. Ultimately the primary discussion at any level, from
Trade-offs are often portrayed as binary – more of global to local, will be about the balance between
this means less of that. Actually it is again much resource conservation and resource exploitation,
more complex: what we are all looking for are using these terms in the broadest sense. A mature
optimal solutions to multiple simultaneous de- conversation will depend on a solid evidential
mands, where the settings on any one trait affect base provided by unbiased science, whereas the
the settings of many others in non-linear ways. weighting of paths and priorities is based on values
Optimisation does not mean any one trait is set to that the whole community must own.
a maximum and there may be multiple solutions. But at the interface is a complex interaction that is
It is the identification of and the choice amongst reflected in part in the concept of risk. Risk means
options that is, in effect, the nature of policy for- different things to different people – some scien-
mation, and this can be difficult. tists may talk in mathematical probabilities, politi-
Page 8Science and New Zealand’s Future
cians think of risk in an electoral sense, the public ance of controversy, or promoted a values-based
generally sees risk through ‘system one’ thinking, position without providing the public with an un-
to use the decision theorist’s term, i.e. that which derstanding of the facts.
is instinctive and emotional. For most people, per- The implications of these issues for society are real.
ceptions of risk are biased by perceptions of who The conflict between the pace of development and
benefits. We have a different attitude to risk if we understanding can be reflected in the rejection of
think we can benefit than if we think someone else science – an illogical but understandable response
benefits. For example, we are happy to break the
speed limit for our advantage and take the risk, “... technological advances must be
but we are likely to be angry when someone else
accompanied by greater scientific
overtakes us at speed. It is little different when we
think about oil wells or sources of energy. literacy for all if a participatory
democracy is to use science well.”
We often forget that there are trade-offs involved
in risk assessment as well. Most think that only
3000 people died in the World Trade Center bomb- to the pace of change. These issues are real and
ings – in fact the toll was about twice that, for peo- technological advances must be accompanied by
ple responded by avoiding aeroplanes and taking greater scientific literacy for all if a participatory
cars and an additional 3000 people died from the democracy is to use science well.
increased traffic on the road. It gets complicated Important decisions made on the basis of en-
– fossil fuel power has killed many more people trenched but knowledge-uninformed views can fix
than nuclear power stations (particularly through positions in a political process that may not be in
coal mine disasters), but the reaction in Germany our best long-term interests. Ultimately, risks will
to the Japanese Fukushima disaster has been to always be assessed emotionally but those emo-
switch back to more fossil fuels. I am not advocat- tions should be informed by what is known or not.
ing any particular technology – merely pointing
out that consideration of risk is not simple and sin- The environment
gular. There are problems around how we weigh A key issue for all New Zealanders is the environ-
up technologies and risk. ment. We are proud as a nation of our environ-
Technologies are developing faster all of the time mental consciousness. But we must not confuse
and they having far greater impact as they pro- bottom-up efforts based on passion with the
ject into the community so much more quickly. need to have a scientifically based approach to
The challenge is for society to understand and environmental protection. We have a particularly
accommodate these technologies at a pace com- high environmental risk because of our geography
mensurate with their development. There is an and ecological history and there is need for world-
urgent need to give far greater weight to the social class defensive biosecurity research. What is the
sciences if we are to cope with the flood of new scope of our natural resources on and offshore:
technologies that are emerging. Otherwise, some how should we manage and exploit them? The sci-
important technologies may be wrongly rejected ence of conservation has advanced considerably.
or their harm overstated and yet others may be I would have liked to see the Forum consider in
misused or their potential harm understated. more detail what this science suggests.
A summary of key points
“There are many examples where the
Key points that emerged in the two days of dis-
mass media has ignored the balance cussion that in my view merit prominence and
of evidence in favour of creating highlight the constructive ways in which we could
false debate or the appearance of move forward include:
controversy...” • It was emphasised that while the science and
innovation ecosystems overlap they are not the
A concern raised at several points during the same. Thus there is a need for distinct mapping
Forum was the role of the media in discussion of and planning of the science and innovation
these issues. There are many examples where the ecosystems.
mass media has ignored the balance of evidence • There was an overwhelming consensus that
in favour of creating false debate or the appear- science should have a significantly greater role
Page 9Science and New Zealand’s Future
to play in mapping our economic, social and vidualistic nature of the New Zealand business
environmental agenda. Science also has a ma- personality. We need to encourage aggregation
jor role to play in informing policy making, in and collaboration, both onshore and offshore.
foresighting and in risk assessment. There was A key feature of overseas innovation ecosys-
a surprisingly widespread concern that science tems is the culture of mentorship and the Fo-
is still perceived in many quarters, including rum identified the general lack of such a culture
within much business, as a luxury rather than within New Zealand entrepreneurial business.
an essential underpinning component of in- • An issue that was clearly identified was the
novation and development across all domains lack of a critical mass of talent in areas of tech-
(even though the significant progress made in
recent years was acknowledged). Areas where
science was identified as being underplayed “An issue that was clearly identified
included in making social spending more ef- was the lack of a critical mass
ficient, understanding our environment and of talent in areas of technology
natural resources, and developing a culture of entrepreneurship.”
innovation. The public science system was seen
as too transactional and insufficiently strategic. nology entrepreneurship. This cannot be ad-
In the policy arena, technology assessment and dressed rapidly from within New Zealand. The
risk assessment were seen as weak. country needs a strategy to attract such talent
• There was a strong feeling that New Zealand has from overseas or alternatively to form strategic
not yet fully embraced a strategy that builds on alliances that could allow assistance from off-
its latent capacities and capabilities so that the shore talent. The relationship to other small
potential to be a small, rich and clever country innovative countries was seen as important in
can be achieved. that regard.
• A major concern was that the science system
• The voice of business at the meeting made sev-
remains fragmented, largely because of two
eral important points that resonated. Firstly, it
factors: under-investment in science and struc-
was clear that successful business understands
tural issues in the public system, including a
the importance of greater corporate responsi-
series of incentives that focus on the individual
bility to the environment and that this is not
or the institution rather than the worth of the
just a superficial statement – rather there is a
science. While the PBRF system has consider-
growing understanding that this is core to suc-
ably enhanced academic attention to outputs,
its focus on the individual is antithetical to
“... it is important that Auckland, which achieving effective collaborative and interdisci-
is the only city that has the scale to plinary research that is at the mainstay of much
create a potentially competitive full science-based innovation. This is exaggerated
science and innovation ecosystem, by a lack of rationalisation in the tertiary sec-
is encouraged in its development on tor, which was seen as a major impediment
(while acknowledging the difficult issue of pa-
behalf of the whole country.” rochial politics). As a result, the Forum repeat-
edly heard that New Zealand science remains
cess. Secondly, it was noted that scale is impor-
silo-ridden with inadequate cross-discipline
tant in innovation ecosystems. In that sense it is
and cross-institutional activity. The structure
important that Auckland, which is the only city
of our contestable funding systems aggravates
that has the scale to create a potentially com-
this problem. It also inhibits intellectually high-
petitive full science and innovation ecosystem,
risk work and therefore the potentially most
is encouraged in its development on behalf of innovative and impactful research3. Thus the
the whole country. Thirdly, we need to use a funding models are seen to seriously disadvan-
variety of approaches to better integrate ac- tage interdisciplinary and innovative science.
tivities across New Zealand and connect them
to Auckland. This in turn relates to my earlier
points regarding fragmentation and incentives. 3 An exception would be the Centres of Research
Fourthly, the very small size of New Zealand Excellence and some platforms administered through
businesses was noted – this reflects the indi- MBIE.
Page 10Science and New Zealand’s Future
This was seen as a critical issue to address with tivities has been identified in most jurisdictions
urgency. and formal procedures established. In general,
• There was overwhelming agreement that far greater use of long-term forecasting is seen as
greater emphasis needs to be given to improv- critical in identifying challenges, developing
ing connectivity within the science system itself, requisite capacities, finding solutions and han-
between science and business, and between dling new technologies.
science and policy. The continuing lack of scien-
tists rotating between these sectors was noted “The lack of forecasting and risk
and several references were made to practical assessment based on science was seen
ways this could be addressed, as it has been as a major deficiency and indeed a risk
in other countries. In turn, these sectors need within the policy process.”
to be better engaged with their counterparts
overseas to ensure that New Zealand can take • There was much discussion on the issues of
full advantage of clever thinking, wherever it resource management and the environment.
originates. Clearly New Zealand greatly values its environ-
• There is an urgent need to lift science literacy ment. The importance of high quality research
and communication. This was discussed in par- in protecting our human and land-based
ticular reference to getting a more constructive resources through public health and biosecu-
national consensus on issues of risk assessment rity research was emphasised. The need for
and understanding the trade-offs that need to research of quality to properly map and under-
be made to move this country ahead. There stand our mineral resources on- and off-shore
was sense that this lack of understanding was was noted. Parenthetically, reports from other
holding back progress. jurisdictions have pointed out the importance
• It was considered that there would be value in of understanding local geological structure in
refining and aligning policy settings across pri- assessing risk levels associated with activities
mary, secondary and tertiary science education such as offshore drilling and fracking – rather
than treating all such activity as the same.
“... aligning policy settings across While there was some passionate environmen-
primary, secondary and tertiary science tal advocacy, there was a good understanding
education to ensure that national that science-based analysis is necessary for
needs for a scientifically literate understanding how best to create a knowledge
population as well as a professionally base against which the complex decisions on
the balance between resource extraction ver-
qualified workforce are met.”
sus conservation can be made. A disappointing
omission from the Forum discussion was the
to ensure that national needs for a scientifically value of science in achieving conservation and
literate population as well as a professionally environmental goals.
qualified workforce are met. Indeed, significant
issues were identified at the boundary between • The image of New Zealand in terms of market-
secondary and tertiary STEM education. There ing was discussed at length. Three valuable
was extensive and exciting discussion around marketing images were apparent. The most
the use of using modern and novel approaches obvious in some markets, particularly mature
to develop science education in ways that could markets, is the environmental image of New
be more inclusive of low decile, rural and high Zealand – there remains a consensus that this is
Māori and Pasifika populations. Several informal important to protect. Secondly, the importance
approaches have been developed by innovative of our corruption-free high quality regulatory
New Zealanders and the potential for some of frameworks was seen as important in many
these to be incorporated more formally into markets, particularly those where food safety
science education merits consideration. is paramount. Thirdly, what is less appreciated
• The lack of forecasting and risk assessment is the importance of being seen as innovative
based on science was seen as a major deficien- and science intensive. It is increasingly clear
cy and indeed a risk within the policy process. that countries that see themselves as clever
The role of science at the centre of these ac- and innovative, particularly those in Asia, want
Page 11Science and New Zealand’s Future
to be aligned with and partner with countries developing those characteristics, alongside those
that they perceive similarly. We were informed of integrity and our recreational and environmen-
that, regrettably, New Zealand is not yet seen tal opportunities, that should make us attractive to
to have those qualities in international surveys. talent. Indeed, I would suggest that the intellectual
This is a point meriting urgent attention. and entrepreneurial environment is the most im-
• International science and science-based diplo- portant component for the kind of talent we want
macy were seen as major ways for New Zealand to capture. We need as a country to value intel-
to sustain and build its relevance, and indeed lectualism, entrepreneurship and curiosity more
your government has already moved in such highly. We need to get beyond polemic and have
directions. much more informed conversations as we try and
enhance our economy.
“International science and science- The Forum sensed that things are changing. The
based diplomacy were seen as major conversation took place in a context that was dif-
ways for New Zealand to sustain and ferent to previous discussions. Firstly, it took place
in a different world – one in which it is much clear-
build its relevance...” er that geographical isolation does not protect a
country from international fiscal crises. Secondly,
• There was extensive discussion within the it took place against a growing understanding that
Forum on Māori perspectives. What is clear is New Zealand has to strive harder to make its place
that there is already evidence of an increasingly in the world. Thirdly, it is understood that science,
innovative Māori engagement using science scholarship and science-based innovation can do
and knowledge for their own and thus New so much more for New Zealand. Fourthly, it took
Zealand’s enhancement. There are potential is- place against a better understanding of how well
sues – in particular in ensuring proper dialogue the small clever countries have done – and we
in discussing and evaluating new technologies aspire to be one of those. Fifthly, the political
– but I am reassured and convinced that with rhetoric has changed and science and innovation
proper engagement a true and unique partner- are now seen as important, even critical. But while
ship in science-based innovation, environmen- some valuable steps have been taken in recent
tal and social enhancement will emerge. years, the lack of an obvious ‘burning platform’ has
meant that perhaps as a country we have yet to
Concluding remarks develop a suitable sense of urgency.
In Gisborne we heard strong arguments for the
many uses of science, yet our combined public and Acknowledgements
private spend on R&D is about a third of that of
our comparator countries and until your govern- I thank the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. John Key, for his
ment recently took some important steps, has support and invitation to write this report.
been diverging from theirs for decades. The deficit I acknowledge the essential contributions of the late Sir
in private sector investment in R&D is concerning; Paul Callaghan both to the national conversation and
it should rise as the public science system becomes to developing the concept of the Forum. Many people
more robust. The challenge remains – and it has to contributed to the organisation of the Forum and I
be asked why have we ended up in this position? would acknowledge in particular Professors Bill Man-
Does it reflect the national psyche and our focus hire, Charles Daugherty, and Lydia Wevers of Victoria
on short-term outcomes? In contradistinction to University of Wellington, Professor Kate McGrath of the
MacDiarmid Institute, Dr Di McCarthy, CEO of the Royal
our individual behaviours, as a nation we seem
Society of New Zealand, and the project coordinator
risk averse, afraid to make mistakes, and rapid to Glenda Lewis.
condemn entrepreneurial failure.
I thank the Royal Society of New Zealand for their as-
Connectedness, commitment and conversation sistance both with the Forum and with summarising the
remain at the heart of our challenge. Sir Paul Calla- conversations. Dr Alan Beedle, Dr Stephen Goldson and
ghan developed the phrase: The place where talent Dr Felicia Low from my Office assisted with summaris-
wants to live. There is global competition for the ing the Forum and preparing this report. Several attend-
innovator, scientist and entrepreneur. To attract ees at the Forum have peer reviewed this report, but I
these people one first needs an ambience of intel- emphasise that the interpretations and conclusions are
lectual adventurism and valuing knowledge. It is my own.
Page 12Science and New Zealand’s Future:
Reflections from the Transit of
Venus Forum
Office of the Prime Minister’s Science Advisory Committee
PO Box 108-117, Symonds Street, Auckland 1150, New Zealand A report to the Prime Minister from
Telephone +64 9 923 1788
Website: www.pmcsa.org.nz
Sir Peter Gluckman
Email: csa@pmcsa.org.nz
Report prepared August 2012
OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ISBN 978-0-477-10384-8 (paperback)
ISBN 978-0-477-10385-5 (PDF)You can also read
