New Zealand is pressing ahead with a decision to encourage research by and about M¨¡oris and Pacific islanders by giving it up to seven times its current weighting in a major annual funding allocation.

A reference group has finished on the design of the next iteration of the research quality evaluation exercise, the Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF), which guides the distribution of NZ$315?million (?166?million) in research grants ¨C making it the second biggest centrally administered tertiary education fund.

On from a 2019 review chaired by Linda Tuhiwai Smith, chair of New Zealand¡¯s M¨¡ori Centre of Research Excellence and a pioneering critic of colonialism in education, the government will adopt a ¡°more capacious¡± definition of research excellence.

The definition will ¡°support diverse research cultures¡± by encompassing ¡°the production of research, engagement and impact¡±, according to a from education minister Chris Hipkins. University staff will be able to demonstrate it by including ¡°traditional outputs¡± in the evidence portfolios they submit for assessment.

51³Ô¹Ï

The government will also increase the ¡°subject area weighting¡± for M¨¡ori-related research from one to three. The weighting, which reflects the relative costs of research in different disciplines, helps to determine each university¡¯s share of PBRF funding.

The change means that M¨¡ori research will be deemed more costly than any other type of research, including in clinical medicine, pharmacy and veterinary science. Its influence on funding will be further amplified through a new ¡°funding weighting¡± of two-and-a-half for evidence portfolios submitted by M¨¡ori staff.

51³Ô¹Ï

Mr Hipkins said these changes would ensure that the PBRF fostered the ¡°intellectual infrastructure¡± to support ¡°m¨¡tauranga M¨¡ori¡±, or M¨¡ori knowledge, in the education system. Pacific research and researchers will be similarly supported with a?subject area weighting of two-and-a-half and a funding weighting of?two.

The government¡¯s decisions exceed the recommendations of the review panel, which advocated a subject area weighting of two-and-a-half for M¨¡ori research to help address the ¡°critical undersupply¡± of researchers. Just 4.8?per cent of participants in the 2018 assessment exercise identified as M¨¡ori, who comprise about 17 per cent of the national population.

While M¨¡ori participation had risen from 3.7?per cent in the 2012 exercise, tertiary education consultant Dave Guerin said progress had been too slow. ¡°Universities have been expected to increase the number of M¨¡ori and Pacifica staff for 30 or 40?years, so the government [is putting] a stronger lever in place. Universities tend to chase money wherever it?is.¡±

The changes reflect a perception that ¡°Western¡± science¡¯s claims to be universal and objective have enabled its advocates to uncritically value it above other knowledge systems.

51³Ô¹Ï

But representative group Universities New Zealand warned of ¡°unintended negative consequences¡± of using a fund ¡°that rewards excellence¡± to boost M¨¡ori participation, unless extra funding was provided. ¡°Equity issues in research must be addressed, [but] the PBRF should [not] be the only mechanism to do so,¡± it said in .

¡°A shift away from research outputs as the key evidence of ¡®excellence¡¯ is problematic,¡± it added.

University of Auckland sociologist Elizabeth Rata said the changes risked diverting M¨¡ori and Pacifica researchers into an approach ¡°that doesn¡¯t follow the scientific principles and methods¡±, under the misapprehension that this would ¡°lead to success¡± in the globally connected higher education world.

Such students would obtain doctorates, ¡°begin their early careers, receive recognition and have their work valued. Then at a certain point, they¡¯ll come across the fact that their work is circumscribed by its limitations.¡±

51³Ô¹Ï

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com