Public Research Agencies Spend Over $270K on Rebranding Efforts

More than $270,000 in taxpayer funds has been allocated by newly established public research organizations in New Zealand for logo design, website creation, and rebranding initiatives, despite a government-provided option available at no cost. This expenditure raises concerns about financial prudence in the public sector.

Information disclosed under the Official Information Act reveals that organizations such as Earth Sciences New Zealand, the Bioeconomy Science Institute, and the Public Health and Forensic Science Institute have each incurred significant costs for branding. Earth Sciences New Zealand alone spent $71,596, supplemented by 364 hours of staff time dedicated to its logo and website development. The Bioeconomy Science Institute’s expenses totaled $89,636, which included $42,735 in legal fees, while the Public Health and Forensic Science Institute spent $68,714. The New Zealand Institute for Advanced Technology has not yet completed its rebranding process.

Government Overhaul and Spending Concerns

These costs were incurred as part of a significant overhaul of New Zealand’s science system, which merged six of the seven Crown Research Institutes into three larger entities in July 2023. The restructured organizations include the merger of Niwa and GNS Science into Earth Sciences New Zealand, while AgResearch, Manaaki Whenua, Plant & Food Research, and Scion formed the Bioeconomy Science Institute. The former ESR has transitioned into the Public Health and Forensic Science Institute.

Shane Reti, New Zealand’s Minister of Science, stated that he was unaware of the rebranding costs prior to their disclosure. He emphasized the importance of financial responsibility among the boards of these public research organizations, urging them to seek efficiencies that would allow for a focus on impactful research.

The spending appears inconsistent with guidance issued by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, which advocates for using a shared government identity that includes a standardized logo featuring the New Zealand Coat of Arms.

The Taxpayers’ Union, which obtained the expenditure figures through multiple OIA requests, criticized the spending as “ego-driven” and “wasteful.” Rhys Hurley, the investigations coordinator for the union, noted that the organizations are effectively “burning through taxpayer cash for flashy logos and websites,” while the government identity remains available at no cost.

Responses from Research Organizations

In response to inquiries regarding the spending, Iain Cossar, the programme director for science system reforms at MBIE, indicated that the ministry had advised the previous Crown Research Institutes to be fiscally prudent in their branding decisions. He acknowledged the necessity for customers and stakeholders to be able to clearly identify these organizations.

Mark Piper, Chief Executive of the Bioeconomy Science Institute, confirmed that the agency has spent $46,900 on brand development and $51,000 on legal advice and trademark registrations to protect its new name and logo. He defended the expenses, stating, “The legal work gives us confidence that we can use our new name and identity, and protects us from future issues.” Piper also stressed that establishing a strong brand is critical, as approximately half of the institute’s revenue derives from non-government sources, necessitating a distinctive identity to connect with clients, collaborators, and investors both domestically and internationally.

The Public Health and Forensic Science Institute reported additional spending of $32,000 since the OIA response, bringing its total expenditure to $100,714. A spokesperson for the organization noted that they do not fall under the classification of government agencies, and thus the government identity guidelines do not apply to them. They clarified that the government identity could be used alongside an organization’s brand, but would not serve as a substitute for rebranding if necessary.

Earth Sciences New Zealand echoed similar sentiments, asserting that they are not a government agency, which exempts them from the requirement to adopt the New Zealand Government identity.

The substantial costs associated with rebranding highlight the need for increased scrutiny and accountability in the management of public funds, particularly within organizations that aim to contribute significantly to New Zealand’s research landscape.