Search

Reports on Aotearoa New Zealand's research, science, and innovation (RSI) system suggest the sector could improve its social responsibility and create more social value. However, researchers and innovators within the sector find this challenging. Through qualitative interviews and a national survey of RSI system participants, this study explores the current perceptions, practices enacted, and support given around responsible research and innovation practices. Findings indicate that researchers and innovators have diverse understandings of what responsible research and innovation entails, viewing anticipation and reflexivity-aligned practices as the most important aspects of responsible research and innovation. Participants feel most supported by research organisations and funding bodies to enact such aspects of responsible practice. However, they perceive a discrepancy, across all dimensions explored, between what researchers and innovators should do, and what they actually do in terms of enacting responsible practices. Thus, significant room for improvement is identified, particularly regarding practices that align with researchers' and innovators' obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and requirements under Vision Mātauranga. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the past decade, collaboration has been the preferred method of devising land and water policy in Aotearoa New Zealand to achieve agreed outcomes. However, the use of collaboration in policymaking is at a crossroads, as some argue it is unrealistic to expect stakeholders and tangata whenua with competing interests to work in partnership on contentious policy issues. To help clarify the future direction of collaboration, this paper provides authorising agencies (those with responsibility for the policy problems) with prompts to reflect ex ante on the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing collaboration. Based on a retrospective review of collaborations in New Zealand's land and water policymaking, and a two-day symposium with collaboration practitioners, we identify situations that are potentially less suited to collaboration owing to factors that are challenging to overcome through process design. Four issues that affect the success of collaborations are identified: the nature of the policy problem, the personal and collective qualities of those involved, power relationships, and the collaborative process. Finally, we draw together practical lessons from history, the symposium, and the literature to develop a list of questions for authorising agencies to use to reflect on the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Primary Innovation programme investigated co-innovation to solve complex agricultural problems in five New Zealand primary sector projects. The projects engaged diverse stakeholders using a collaborative, integrative process to co-define problems, and co-create and implement solutions. Each project included a Reflexive Monitor, who facilitated group relationships, encouraged a systems perspective, and integration of multiple disciplinary and stakeholder knowledges. Reflexive Monitors also encouraged reflexive practice and adaptive project management, while helping the team pursue the project ambition for change. This paper, with respect to the five projects, seeks to address the following research question: Is co-innovation an effective research approach for achieving societal impact from innovations? To address this question, we describe attempts to operationalise and measure co-innovation through 1) five behavioural principles of co-innovation, 2) Reflexive Monitors' focus on each principle, and 3) the presence or absence of elements of the Integration and Implementation Sciences Framework (i2S) for enhancing research impact. We evaluate the relationship between these three process measures and project success, measured by outputs and two proxy impact measures: participants' subjective comparisons with the counterfactual and anticipated achievement of desired long-term impacts. Results indicated that the five principles of co-innovation and the presence or absence of elements defined in the i2S framework were positively related to the three success measures. This suggests validity of these measurement tools, and of using a co-innovation approach and/or systematic attention to the elements of the i2S framework to enhance the processes, outcomes and impacts of projects tackling complex real-world problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study provides empirical evidence of the link between outlook and practice among farmers, foresters, and growers in New Zealand. Specifically, we use a large, nationally representative survey to assess how foci on production and environmental outcomes influence the adoption of six good management practices aimed at increasing agricultural sustainability. We then show that while environmentally oriented and production-oriented decision-makers are statistically more prepared to take risks, all rural decision-makers are more likely to adopt new technologies and good practices after seeing their relative advantages successfully demonstrated. Next, we show that social and professional networks are small, often limited to five or fewer operators, which begs the question about how the risk-averse operators become informed about good practice. Hence, we ultimately analyse trust in order to identify other credible demonstrators or informants. We find that veterinarians are the most trusted source of information and that government (at all levels) is the least. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The exploratory study aimed to understand the range of community responses to three pest eradication technologies proposed for use in New Zealand and to examine community perceptions of past incursion responses, with the aim of improving future responses. Qualitative techniques were used to elicit information from a small group of people selected from the general public, the Department of Conservation and three government councils. Participants were fairly trusting of the basic information provided to them about the three technologies, and as a result were generally accepting of aerial spraying of pheromones and sterile insect technology. However, the use of aerial sprays presented some concerns. More in-depth information, the manner in which it was presented, and how the community was be included in the decision-making process were likely to be the significant influences in predicting the public response to eradication attempts in the future. Recommendations for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The political imperative of increasing commercialization of science is frequently viewed as contributing to a problem of public mistrust in science. One proposed solution, favored in political circles, is increased public engagement and participation in the science agenda. This study aims at exploring and explaining scientists' responses to calls for increased dialogue and engagement with the public on the social and ethical implications of scientific research. Findings are presented from interviews with scientists regarding their views on the democratization of science and on the impacts of the increasing commercialization of science. Scientists supported the democratization of science but were divided on the extent of the public's role. There was evidence of the deficit theory of public understanding of science influencing some scientists' thinking about democratization. Generally, negative beliefs were expressed about commercialization, but a sense of resignation was also evident. Some apparent contradictions between the aims of democratization and the consequences of commercialization are noted. Implications for science careers and science management are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identifies common causes of mold growth in buildings. Principles essential for preventing mold contamination indoors; Need for physicians and healthcare workers to be aware of the conditions within buildings; Results of an inadequate building maintenance.