Management of the Research Programme
We feel that we are not able to comment substantively on the most appropriate institutional arrangements for the conduct of the management of a future research programme, because so much depends on what is agreed between the government and the agricultural sector representatives. The form of management structure that would be appropriate for a partnership between government and the agricultural sector would not be appropriate if the research programme were imposed on an unwilling sector. However, we make the following observations:
- The scientific skill base is limited and dispersed among several research organisations. The future management structure will need to be able to draw effectively on all available skills, and we believe that all research providers should feel confident that they will receive even-handed treatment by the funding/management organisation.
- The current informal network (NzONET) encourages close and effective collaboration among scientists working on various aspects of nitrous oxide emissions and government policy advisers, and has been an effective tool in determining research priorities for inventory-related research. However, it may need a more formal approach if it is to serve a wider role.
- METHNET is a useful communication network, but does not yet have a central role in setting research priorities and may never have given the establishment of the PGGRC.
- The Research Consortium model offers a satisfactory management and accountability mechanism should a partnership between government and the sector emerge. We are firmly of the view that a partnership is the only viable relationship that will offer the long-term continuity that the research programme demands.
- The PGGRC has set itself a specific role of basic research on methane emission abatement, at least at its initial development. The Consortium includes AgResearch Ltd, both as a partner and as a major research provider. This arrangement may be appropriate, given that AgResearch's predominant expertise is in the fields of research that PGGRC has adopted in its initial portfolio. Nevertheless, the dual role that AgResearch plays raises a question of how the conflict of interest is managed. We question whether such an arrangement is appropriate for a more comprehensive research programme to be delivered by a range of research providers.
Collaboration with Other Countries
The Workshop demonstrated that there is considerable potential to enhance existing collaborative research and to develop new relationships with research organisations in other countries. We note that there is there is already a significant level of collaborative research, such as the cooperation with the US and Canada on methane emission measurements, and the arrangement between PGGRC and CSIRO on the testing of methanogen vaccines. We also note that at a scientist-to-scientist level there is a high level of communication and cooperation.
We consider that New Zealand is well placed to attract cooperative and collaborative interest through its leadership in the relevant research fields. For this reason, it is important that the funding and the management of the research programme creates the opportunity for collaborative effort to occur.
Contact for Enquiries
MAF Information Services
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
Fax: +64 4 894 0721
Contact this person
