Guidelines covering expert advice from the Royal Society of New Zealand

The Royal Society is charged by its Act to: “To provide expert advice on important public issues to the Government and the community:” Following strategic discussion by Council in 2003, the Society created its own Policy Unit. Council has also stipulated (October 2005) that the Society will normally retain the right to publish any policy or expert advice commissioned by a government agency, subject to sufficient time being allowed for government to receive and review the advice, and subject to removal of any budget or commercially sensitive specific information.

The policy paper process spans a spectrum from responses to requests for information, to policies developed by Council. These processes vary in their approval, time consumption, and consultation. However, all resulting papers are intended to both inform policy-makers and be available for public attention.

1.  Policy/Advice Papers

1a.  Society Council papers

When a group wishes to speak with the full authority of the Society, we use a formal and detailed process. The initial proposal for the paper, along with any new funds needed to cover the costs, may be generated by Society or Academy Council, one of its sub-committees exercising delegated powers, by staff, or by a Constituent Organisation. Examples are the Society’s submission to the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification, our 2001 Manifesto for Change paper, and our 2002 paper Harnessing Excellence

All such papers undergo an inclusive drafting and consultation process amongst Councillors, Constituent Organisations, and New Zealand (and in some cases, overseas) experts. Public notification is given that a study is underway, and progress is generally written up in ALERT. External contractors may be brought in, as with the 2004 R&D tax paper , which was contracted out to Canterbury’s Adrian Sawyer.

Council must review and approve the paper before it can be described as a paper approved by the Council of the Royal Society. In earlier drafts, the paper may be referred to as a discussion draft, not formally approved by Council

1b.  Academy Papers

Release of papers by the Academy is subject to its own bylaws, unless in conflict with the Society. In recent years, the Academy has not issued policy papers in its own right, preferring instead to ensure harmonisation with Society views.

1c.  Committee Papers

In cases where policy comes from a Society committee, no paper may claim to represent the views of the Society as a whole. Committees can and do issue their own views in their own area. Papers of this type are often written in response to government discussion documents. Committees are encouraged to bring important papers for approval if they wish to claim the imprimatur of Council. Committees are requested, when making their operational plan each year, to consider what government policy might be forthcoming, or what expert inputs might be needed. For example, the Social Sciences Committee recently conducted a review of the first year of operation of the PBRF.

2.  Discussion papers

From time to time, the Society will commission an informative discussion paper, publish it, and ask for feedback. Sometimes these lead to new policy positions being adopted by Council. Further, the CEO pens a weekly editorial in our e-mail newsletter, ALERT. Others have a standing invitation to submit editorials also. Editorials are always attributed to the person, not the Society. Guidelines for editorials are that they must be responsible and constructive. From feedback, they appear to be well received and regarded as advancing policy discussion in New Zealand.

3.  Requests for Information

Occasionally, staff are asked to respond to a policy paper or questionnaire issued by MoRST or a similar agency. Generally, time frames are tight. In cases where a response falls within a well-established Society policy position, staff will draft a response. As time permits, staff e-mail the draft to relevant Constituent Organisations and to Councillors (NB, each year, we ask Constituent Organisations to set up internal mechanisms for rapid feedback from their own members). The response is finalised, sent, and recorded as an information item in Council papers. It carries a statement that it has not been presented to Council.  Council may also be invited to review the paper for possible adoption as a Council view, thereby giving it more weight with the originating agency.

In some cases, a response may slightly extend the Society’s position. One example would be the staff’s response to MoRST’s paper on capability issues in RS&T . The Policy Unit answered the structured questions, but others arose that had not been considered widely by staff or members of the Society. In that situation, we consulted with members with relevant experience. Council later reviewed the paper and approved it. However, there was not sufficient time for this approval to occur before the closing date for submissions on that discussion. Hence it was submitted as a staff paper.

4.  Reports to MoRST

4a.  Advice in our role as a Purchase Agent

Where the Society acts as a purchase agent, submissions may come from the staff who deliver against the relevant part of our contracts, informed by consultation with members of the Marsden Council or other panels. For example, our advice regarding the reality of full-cost funding was informed by discussions with members who were purchasers and users of large-scale assets at universities and CRIs. Our own advice was informed by the staff’s experience in supporting the Marsden Fund, where overhead rates have been a topic of recent concern. These papers were approved for submission and publication by the Chief Executive, and included as information items to Council, for any further comment they wished to make.

4b.  Progress and Achievements Report

Four years ago, MoRST required that Purchase Agents compile, each year, a strategically oriented report on their Progress and Achievements (PAR) against contract. This report soon became modified to include analysis and recommendations. In essence, it is the vehicle each year where Purchase Agents make their pitch for modifications to the policy instruments they administer.  In the last two years, the Minister has also asked that Purchase Agents “situate” the programmes they administer within the general landscape of RS&T funding in New Zealand, and comment on their appropriateness as well as their effectiveness and efficiency. The Royal Society is a unique Purchase Agent, as it has its own independent role as well. Thus, we have used the PAR to illustrate the close synergies between government programmes and our own. We have introduced a step where the Presidents of Society and Academy Councils provide feedback on the recommendations we propose to make, as Purchase Agents, to government. Note, however, that government changes the timetable each year, and we have to react accordingly.

We are, after a suitable time interval for the Minister to digest, allowed to publish our PAR on our web site. When we do, we are generally asked to remove some of the specifics with budget implications.

4c.  MoRST Requests

MoRST may occasionally request the Society to prepare a report or discussion paper, such as our “Futurewatch” report on biotechnology . A similar approach was made when MoRST initiated the “Oxygen” group of young scientists. The Society has retained the right to publish its own final report (after due time for the Minister to consider the report). It is important that our role as an independent agency not be undermined by charges of private advice.

5.  Public Hearings Processes

The Royal Society of London is often seen as providing the gold standard for quality and robustness of process.(see here, and here) Committees of Fellows engage in evidence hearing, discussion and consensus development. The process is more structured than the process that we use. There is also more emphasis on dissemination after publication.

From time to time, the Government of Canada asks their Royal Society to undertake public hearings. In response, the RSC has developed a detailed protocol for public hearings, including taking of evidence, and publication of interim and final results. Expert Panels are formed in response to requests from governments and other organisations for guidance on public policy issues where specialized knowledge is required.  This methodology is available from their web site.