Budget 2024 and the future of the science sector in New Zealand – experts’ reaction

May 30, 2024

Science has been notably absent from the coalition government’s messages about their policies first budget.

It is the main source of financing, i.e National scientific challenges, end next month after 10 years; and while The science and university sectors continue to be reviewed.

SMC asked experts for comment.

Professor Nicola Gaston, Co-Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, comments:

“This is not a surprising budget for science, research and our universities, but it is a challenge. I won’t bother commenting on the cancellation of projects planned by the previous government, but I will reiterate that the long-term trend is for the sector to run out due to inflation against an unchanged level of underlying funding.

“The 25% reduction due to inflation over the last decade has now been joined by the loss of funding from the National Science Challenge established by Steven Joyce a decade ago. Perhaps the key thing to note here is that much of this funding came from existing research funding and was reallocated to national research centers. Losing this money from the system means a cut in funding compared to 2014, even before we start worrying about accounting for inflation. This is something new.

“I’m actually surprised that the minister, who has a lot to say about the value of science, agreed to such cuts in existing funding (again, I repeat, I’m not talking about canceled new initiatives). Science and innovation is an ecosystem and many of the outcomes this government would like to see – technical skills development, commercialization, business investment in research and development and all the important economic contributions innovation can make – will be seriously hampered when so many parts of the system are struggling “

Conflict of Interest Statement: “Co-Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, New Zealand Center of Research Excellence.”

Dr Lucy Stewart, co-chair of the New Zealand Scientists Association, comments:

“Typically, when assessing the budget from a science policy perspective, we can look for bright spots – new spending and initiatives. The analysis of this year’s budget is to determine how severe the damage will be, with previously announced cuts such as the cancellation of the Science City infrastructure program and the failure to restart the National Science Challenges program.

“There is one truly welcome new initiative – funding for Geonet, the National Seismic Hazard Model and the National Geohazard Monitoring Center has been extended through 2027, confirming the long-term nature of the funding needed to support this crucial work in our geologically active nation. However, looking to 2027, the budget also includes actual cuts of $35 million to the Marsden Fund, the Health Research Fund, the Strategic Science and Innovation Fund and the Endeavor Fund this year – perhaps to generously give researchers three years to find new job abroad. Otherwise, spending remains broadly unchanged during a period of record inflation and decades of underfunding of the sector. There is certainly no indication that anything will even remotely compensate for the loss of the National Science Challenges, which, as we have already seen, has resulted in proposed job cuts in the public science sector.

“I expect to see more layoffs across the sector before the end of the year. This lack of investment, at a time when the research and science sector has already been struggling to outperform for years with insufficient funding, will have the inevitable consequences of a loss of expertise as people move to better-funded research sectors abroad as infrastructure failure, and the research just doesn’t stop.

“Almost forty years ago, a target of 2% of GDP was set for research and development spending, appropriate for a high-skilled, innovative economy. Successive governments have declared that they want this country to become. With this budget, we are no closer to achieving that goal, and perhaps even further.

Conflict of interest statement: “I am also a spokesperson for the Save Science Coalition, a group of organizations representing scientists who are campaigning against cuts to the public science sector.”

Professor Troy Baisden, co-chair of the New Zealand Scientists’ Association; Principal Investigator at Te Pūnaha Matatini; Collaborator at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research; and Honorary Professor in the Faculty of Environment, University of Auckland, comments:

“Today’s budget is doubling in a way that has been seen over the four decades that New Zealand governments, as world leaders, have chosen not to invest in the future. Apart from 1991, I doubt whether there has ever been such a clear case that we are determined to lag behind other countries with our investment in research, science, innovation and technology. The same applies to the higher education sector.

“The budget is worse than a nothing burger for science. Relatively positive support for GeoNet and key capabilities in GNS Science appears to be supporting areas previously funded by the Earthquake Commission (EQC) and the National Science Challenge on Resilience.

“There are no other aid programs for areas of national importance supported by the National Science Challenges program, which at its peak received approximately $97 million annually, with $64 million this year and no funding next month. There are also no new rescue packages or investment support packages for Wellington’s Science City institutions, in particular Callaghan Innovation.

“Given the makeup of the coalition, farmers might have been hoping for some new research, but if that happens, I don’t see it happening. Instead, the Ministry of Primary Industries will cut approximately $4.6 million annually in spending on sustainable land management and climate change research in the coming years (a total reduction of $13.6 million over 3 years).

“The complete lack of new financing comes on top of inflation over the past year and against a backdrop of flat or declining financing. In 2027 and beyond, a small but significant amount is planned to be returned to flagship questionable research funds, including Marsden and Endeavor.

“The table of estimates prepared on the basis of the budget also allows us to look back, from the estimates for the year just ended to the finalized financing in previous years. Funding for the entire higher education sector has stagnated after the government helped stabilize the sector during the impact of the pandemic. There seems to be no hope of resuming the growth rate of around 24% in 2012–2019.

“Government research and development (R&D) grew even faster, but is now declining. Excluding the R&D tax incentive and similar categories, our investment appears to have increased from approximately $820 million in 2015 to $1.4 billion or more in 2020 and 2021, before declining to USD 1.15, and then stabilized at USD 1.1 billion.

“This explains why times are tight in parts of the sector that are doing well and desperate in others. This should come as no surprise, as cabinet documents from 2021 to date have expressed a lack of confidence and called for reforms that will now extend to the university sector.

“The pressure is on Sir Peter Gluckman, who leads two advisory groups, to make the case for reforms that will help us rebuild the mojo that drives investment and success across the science system and universities. Groups will need to provide vision and hope for science and technology to address our biggest challenges with effective strategies in areas such as primary industries and tackling climate change and threats. Equal countries are investing more and more, and we should too.”

Conflict of Interest Statement: “Receives and seeks government and university funding for research and teaching.”

Professor Frederique Vanholsbeeck, Director of the Te Whai Ao Dodd-Walls Centre, comments:

“The biggest item in this budget is a $3 billion tax cut. Therefore, this is not a budget intended to invest in our future.

“Looking at the net result of the higher education sector, it is very sad. The clear losers are the students. College will be more expensive not only in terms of actual costs, but also when you take inflation into account. $50 a fortnight won’t cover the first year of free college, which is no longer available. Transferring to your final year of study without fees is intended to save you money.

“Finance for research is also losing. Health Research Council and Marsden grants have not increased, so given runaway inflation this will mean fewer grants or grants that will not cover a sufficient proportion of the researcher’s salary. This is a real problem as more and more researchers are on fixed-term contracts and have to fund their salaries entirely from grants such as Marsden and HRC.

“The MBIE Endeavor Fund is growing slightly (5%?) but is not in line with inflation or simply. Combined with the loss of the National Science Challenges, this is a real loss for research funding.

“There has been a net decline in contested funding. I have not been able to find an increase in funding for CRI centers and universities. Most rows with research titles are at or below last year’s, which is an actual decline when adjusted for inflation. In a completely cost-based science financing model, the allocation of grant funds must keep pace with inflation. The number of doctoral students is expected to decrease. This government is not investing in Aotearoa as a knowledge economy.”

Conflict of Interest Statement: “I am the Director of the Dodd Walls Center for Photonics and Quantum Technologies and the President of the Australian and New Zealand Optical Society. My work benefits from funding for science and research.”

© Scoop Media