Changes to New Zealand research funding rules are ¡°disappointing and worrying¡± for humanities academics, deans said, as the social sciences become increasingly sidelined from grant schemes.

From 1 February, humanities and social science (Hass) research projects supported by?Horizon Europe?have??from New Zealand¡¯s Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE).

Horizon Europe adds 25 per cent to its research grants to cover overheads like laboratories, consumables and technicians¡¯ pay. The MBIE top-up funding is designed to cover any shortfall with an additional 60 per cent allocation, capped at a little over NZ$1 million (?455,000).

The department said the exclusion of Hass would ¡°better align¡± the top-up funding with the government¡¯s priorities for the Catalyst Fund, which funnels about NZ$30 million a year into collaborative international research.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

In early December, then science minister Judith Collins??to make it ¡°laser focused¡± on ¡°research delivering clear benefits¡±. She nominated the ¡°clear growth areas of quantum technology, health, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, space and Antarctic research¡±.

The government has also?banned Hass?disciplines from its main scheme to support basic research, the Marsden Fund.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°It¡¯s an existential threat for us, but also for the country,¡± said Bruce Cohen, president of the Sociological Association of Aotearoa New Zealand. ¡°Funding inside as well as outside of the university system was already tight before it was taken from us with these announcements.¡±

Cohen said a 20-strong team of sociologists in his department a decade ago had been reduced to just nine. ¡°Our postgraduate and post-doctorate researchers are seriously considering the viability of their future study and work prospects here.¡±

Heather Zwicker, president of the Australasian Council of Deans of Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities (Dassh), said Hass was ¡°the proverbial canary in the coalmine¡± ¨C as evidenced by the Trump administration¡¯s?blocking of research grants?through the National Institutes of Health.

¡°That starts with a tax on the arts; it starts with reducing funding for Hass. That¡¯s why this should be worrying, not just to people who practise in Hass but to all researchers and indeed to all societies,¡± she said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°I understand that governments are strapped for cash¡­and difficult choices have to be made, [but] there¡¯s a¡­kind of dream around how quickly economic returns [come] from science.¡±

Hass was overlooked in changes stemming from the first?Science System Advisory Group report, despite strong advocacy from the group. ¡°Given the government spends such a high proportion of its budget in the social sector¡­the importance of high-quality data-informed social sector research¡­should be obvious,¡± it said.

The report contains eight references to Hass. The government¡¯s response, outlined in a?, contains none.

Collins, whose tenure as science minister ended on 24 January, insisted that the rule changes would not prevent social research. ¡°There¡¯s plenty of funding in other parts of the system,¡± she said in a??interview the same day.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

She said she wanted to improve value from science funding by directing money to ¡°science¡± rather than ¡°frankly indulgent¡± uses of taxpayers¡¯ money, citing a NZ$660,000 Marsden grant to map Buddhist law in Asia and a NZ$360,000 project investigating the sociological impact of giant sculptures including a carrot, a kiwifruit and a soft drink bottle. ¡°That is the sort of thing that I¡¯ve actually had enough of and I think the New Zealand public [has] too,¡± Collins said.

Zwicker said it was ¡°always easy¡± to ridicule individual grants. ¡°The study of big things around New Zealand is actually not about the big carrot ¨C it¡¯s about how people articulate their sense of belonging.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com