Innovate or stagnate: OECD Report for New Zealand
22/08/2007
The primary message of the OECD Report on New Zealand.s national innovation system is very clear, say the chief executives of the nine Crown Research Institutes, New Zealand.s largest research organisations.
`The Report is remarkably frank: New Zealand has no hope of regaining a place in the top half of the OECD nations if we continue to under-invest in RS&T,. summarises Anthony Scott, executive director of the Association of Crown Research Institutes.
`These recommendations cannot be dismissed as special pleading. The Report comes from independent outside experts who know the global context.
`While other nations have been rushing to increase their already high investment in RS&T, New Zealand.s investment has dropped as a proportion of GDP. We are now in the bottom third of OECD countries, spending about half the 2003 OECD average.
`New Zealand was giving aid not so long ago to some nations that now outrank us. The single biggest investment that made a difference was sustained investment in RS&T.
`Why do we think we will increase our living standards by some other route? Relying upon cyclical commodity booms is akin to relying upon Lotto for one.s pension.
`More money is necessary, but not sufficient. Other areas also need attention. All can be addressed in short order given leadership across the political, business and science spectrum.
`This Report is a very constructive base for sound, evidence-based action. Some recommendations have already been taken up, such as the R&D tax credits.
`And while university salaries have been boosted by central government, this is not so for staff in the only research organisations clearly owned by Government.
`Recruitment and retention issues are identified by both the OECD and CRIs as critical issues for New Zealand.s future. We are competing to retain our own kids, let alone to attract other high skilled people from off-shore.
`The OECD Report endorses the distinctive contributions of crown research institutes, universities and others in the national innovation system. Each has its role to play.
`CRI chief executives are very supportive of the role played by universities as research-led teaching organisations with particular research strengths. These complement the long-term, highly sector-engaged relationships and strategic approach of CRIs.
`The degree of collaboration between CRIs and universities has increased dramatically in recent years. Almost all CRIs are co-located on a university campus, CRIs fund professorial chairs, and share research contracts and facilities.
`Greater clarity of roles and of funding streams will undoubtedly go a long way to further improving these relationships and reducing the fragmentation of research effort and resources.
`The Government has to come to the party too, in reducing the numerous, fragmented and under-funded pots in the overall government system. We welcome the Prime Minister.s identification of that as an issue when launching the Report.
`The OCED recommends CRIs receive core or block funding of up to one-half. This discretionary funding would complement research commissioned by the government.s central purchaser or private sector clients. It also recognises that the CRIs are the least financially resilient of the public research organisations.
`At present, all revenue a CRI gains is won through some form of competition. The OECD states `truly stable funding has been indeed exceptionally low..
`The OECD recognises that this utter reliance upon the whims of the market shackles the capability of CRIs and under-values the global knowledge, insights and connectedness of CRIs.
`It notes that often the CRI is better placed than anyone else to know the best area to focus resource for long term benefit to New Zealand.
`At the same time, the chief executives insist that all funding must be linked to performance. This is a key accountability back to our owners, the New Zealand public. CRIs strongly endorse the OECD recommendation for ex post evaluation.
`The OECD points out the cost of over-attachment to the 1980.s fashion to split policy, purchase and provider, and the commitment to competition for competition.s sake.
`New Zealand took this to extremes and created a thicket of over-administration, duplication of red-tape and compliance measures. These inflate the cost of bidding, deliver less to the benchtop scientist and cause intense frustration amongst staff simply wanting to get on with the job.
`This reaches into Boards and management, with some feeling they are being disempowered: given all the responsibility, few tools and little freedom to operate. That is no way to attract and retain top talent in these complex, challenging and vital publicly owned entities.
`The chief executives of the CRIs are keen to work with Government, business and other research providers to pick up on these insights and make the necessary changes..
