At last : intelligent publishing!

Scientific publishing was simpler when we only had paper to use. In the Earth sciences, for example, we had printed maps, books, reports, pamphlets and journal papers, all very familiar to publishers and readers. Now the world has gone digital, the publishing job has become more complicated but at the same time more exciting

Improving the implementation of regulation: time for a systemic approach

The importance of an ‘efficient and effective regulatory environment’ (Offices of the Ministers of Finance and Regulatory Reform, 2013) has never been more prominent in New Zealand than it is at the present time. The New Zealand Productivity Commission’s Regulatory Institutions and Practices report, which is both a product of and contributor to this enhanced prominence, noted that there is growing interest in regulation in New Zealand stemming from the increased importance of individual freedoms and human rights, the growing awareness of the impacts of both good and bad regulation, the way government now organises itself to provide services and implement policy, and the diversity of society and its range of attitudes to risk and expectations about government’s actions. There are many ways to enter into a discussion about an efficient and effective regulatory environment: for example, through the lens of boosting New Zealand’s productivity growth, international competitiveness and living standards (Minister of Finance and Minister of Regulatory Reform, 2009); in relation to the increasing focus on good public sector management, which includes regulatory system stewardship (Treasury, 2013); or by addressing the importance of avoiding, responding to and learning from regulatory disasters (Black, 2014). Discussions may or may not include philosophical perspectives on the place or volume of regulation. But, whatever the view on more or less regulation, or the entry point to the discussion (broad economic performance, regulatory stewardship or avoiding regulatory failures), we probably all agree that regulation that is in place should provide benefits that would not accrue in its absence, at reasonable cost

Breaking the consensus: The politicisation of Maori affairs

This article takes issue with the claim made by Tremewan (2005a) that the New Zealand social sciences have been uncritical of neotraditionalist and culturalist trends in social policy. It points out that at least since the 1980s there has existed a significant body of social science literature critical of these trends. The article also takes issue with Tremewan’s attribution of increased political dissent in the area of Maori affairs to the culturalist ideological currents dominating social policy. The article provides an alternative explanation for this increase in political dissent by focusing upon the material conditions of existence and the opportunism of power-seeking politicians