Primary cuts
Agricultural research faces unsettling times with funding cuts and staff losses, writes Gerard Hutching.
Victoria University’s Dr Peter Pfeffer says when the present AgResearch chief executive Dr Tom Richardson laid out his vision for the organisation, it was along the lines of ‘‘we don’t want any heroes’’.
‘‘What he meant was they don’t want individual excellence but teamwork. But that’s not how the really good scientists work. They all have a big ego, because they work in some ways for themselves, take that away and you are left with second rate scientists who do simple experiments.
‘‘That’s not something that will move New Zealand forward. You want to get deeper insights,’’ Pfeffer says.
Richardson clarifies the point, saying he rates teamwork highly, but for him the AgResearch heroes are not just the ‘‘rock star scientists’’.
In 2014 Pfeffer moved on from AgResearch where he had been a team leader focusing on reproductive biology in cattle, to Victoria.
Richardson is still at AgResearch, where last week he announced 83 jobs across the country would disappear in a proposed restructure, although at the same time 27 new jobs would be created.
The cuts came hard on the heels of losses in the 2014-15 year, when 10 scientists resigned and 15 were made redundant, while the services of 15 technicians were dispensed with.
The changes are part of a grand plan to shift resources to two hubs, one centred on Lincoln University, the other on Massey.
To Pfeffer the cuts are sign of a Crown Research Institute (CRI) in disarray. His Victoria colleague Ken McNatty agrees, arguing New Zealand has too small a pool of talent to mess around with constant restructurings.
These scientists, as well as respected elder statesmen such as Dr Jock Allison, who used to head AgResearch’s Invermay campus, and Lincoln University’s Professor Jon Hickford, believe the problems are deep seated and at the cost of the agricultural economy.
‘‘The losses are horrific, and millions of dollars have been spent on moving people and rebuilding institutions. I know the key players around the world in my area of reproductive biology and many have expressed a desire to come to New Zealand but there isn’t anywhere for them to go,’’ McNatty says. Their concerns are centred on: a loss in funding; a loss of key staff; lack of a strategic vision; research that is impractical and of no use to farmers.
Minister of Science and Innovation Steven Joyce says figures on the total spend on agricultural research (government, universities and private) are difficult to obtain.
His best estimate puts it at $444 million ($195m from business, $192m from government and $58m from universities).
Since 2008 the total amount has risen by 12 per cent, from $398m, Joyce says, although government funding has fallen in the same period by 9.9 per cent, from $213m.
The big change has been in the amount spent by the business sector, which Joyce says indicates a growing preference for companies to conduct their own research rather than contract it out to government agencies.
Allison says the figures do not give an accurate impression, especially of government funding because they do not take into account inflation. Since 2008 inflation has robbed the dollar of 12 per cent of its purchasing power. Add to that the 9.9 per cent cuts in government funding, and the true government spend is down 20.7 per cent, to $169m.
The loss of key staff is arguably more serious than the funding cuts.
It takes at least 15 years to become competent at leading a