Soul-searching over profits from research

By Yoke har Lee

Between the lines


Government research chief Dr James Buwalda recalls two years ago when he and his team were a lone voice on the need to realign the country's science and technology system to help create a knowledge-based society.

Such an alignment has been a key policy issue for years in many developed countries but not so in New Zealand.

Dr Buwalda defines a knowledge-based economy as one able to create, strengthen and apply knowledge to generate wealth for society. Take our trees. Are they pure commodities or could they be turned, say, into a new high-value material used in car interiors?

To help identify New Zealand's future, the Government invited submissions on the country's best options. Called the Foresight Project, the work culminated in the Blueprint for Change in May.

Also in pursuit of the knowledge economy, the Government developed a package of policy initiatives announced this week under the Bright Future slogan.

Fundamental to all this is how we deploy funds in our science system. To help identify prospects for creating a knowledge economy, the Government proposed this week a $36 million pool for research to seek out potential new industries.

The Foundation for Research Science and Technology, as the distributor of the taxpayer-funded $300 million Public Good Science Fund, would like to handle this additional money but Dr Buwalda says the work will be open to tender.

Meanwhile, the foundation has already begun to change the way the Public Good funds will be allocated.

It is addressing criticism that the Crown Research Institutes have monopolised funds. Dr Buwalda is also aware of criticism that the foundation's board (the "buyer" of scientific research) has members from the institutes (the "sellers" of research).

Technology New Zealand, one of the foundation's most successful agents, is also likely to have its role expanded. Dr Buwalda says new activities could include the kickstarting of new companies.

Another area for soul-searching is whether the institutes should return to their original role as researchers rather than try to make profits as well.

Some people argue their research prowess will be diluted by decreeing that they also focus on making profits. The notion of a science provider being engaged in business also gives grounds for industries to be concerned about competition.

Lastly, is the difficult question of who owns (and can thus profit from) the intellectual property generated by publicly funded research? Is it the Government, the institutes or companies which collaborated in projects?

Resolution on all these issues is needed before taxpayer-funded science can deliver its full potential in the knowledge economy.