Research | RA2-3 — Mobilising For Action

Our Research | Co-producing Biosecurity for the Ngahere

Reframing Biosecurity Tension through a Citizen
Social Science Approach

Page Quicklinks

Funded Years: 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23

Meet the Research Team

Research Brief

Forest Users

Biosecurity challenges are mounting for Aotearoa New Zealand. Kauri dieback, myrtle rust, and the risk of brown marmorated stink bug are biosecurity challenges for New Zealand forests and are transmitted in-part by the actions we, as forest users of all types, take while we visit our iconic forests. In this project we co-investigate:

who ‘good forest users’ are and
what good forests users do.

The overall project aim will enable user groups to frame the problem of - and responses to - biosecurity from their perspective, needs and subjectivities, and to put these into practice.

Methodology

This three-year project uses citizen social science approaches to enable a diverse range of forest users to make decisions about what forest-health and biosecurity measures they would like to see that protect the health of managed forests, and then undertake these actions themselves and enact these measures.

Year One

In the first year, we interacted with Park rangers to gain an understanding of who the high-risk (HR) user groups were and how these users/groups relate to, make sense of, and interact with the forests from the rangers’ perspectives. We also developed a variety of ‘in-place’ methods to be used, including the development of virtual ‘in-place’ approaches to enable discussion in forests with HR user groups.

Year Two

Citizen science is used in the second stage (second year) of the project for co-creation of processes for biosecurity in the ngahere. Citizen science engagement methodologies will be used as a tool to assist the development of sustainable biosecurity ‘tools’ (including policies) for a more inclusive, user-centered, problem-solving process in urban and periurban forests.

Citizen science has rarely been used in biosecurity co-design, and the engagment with multiple types of forest users will, we hope, establish new dialogues and insights that can improve our understanding about what is needed for biosecurity.

Year Three

In the third stage (and third year) we will work with others towards the implementation of biosecurity options with the user group. Funding for these tools will be necessary, but as we intend working closely with policy practitioners in this stage, the process is intended to empower them to deliver these co-created tools. We will collect data on the feasibility of each ‘tool’ by creating a space for interaction between forest user groups, rangers and policy makers.

At the close of the project we will return to the rangers, who provided us with the initial assessment, and assess their perception of the impact and success of the various measures implemented.

Research Outcomes

Methodology

This project has contributed to more a fine-grained understanding of:

who the forest users are
how and where they interact with the forests, and
how risky (or not) their interactions with the forest are.

It has also contributed to the development of co-creation methodologies which will be implemented in the second phase.

The project has contributed to our understanding of rangers as core actors within the bio-security space. The research team has digitalised maps of High Risk user distribution, of which the visual data will be publicly available.

Masters Research

Wen Qing’s masters research has developed:

a storymap about the methodology used to engage with Park Rangers, and
a documentary video about the use of biosecurity dogs.

*Click on the image to view the documentary*

View Documentary

Peer reviewed Publications

Two peer reviewed journal papers are being prepared for publication.

Read Publication

Park rangers and science-public expertise: Science as care in biosecurity for kauri trees in Aotearoa/New Zealand

Published in Minerva January 2022

In this paper we argue that park rangers hold a unique set of knowledge – of science, of publics, of institutional structures, of place, and of self – that should be recognised as valuable. For too long, models of the knowledge of scientists and publics have set people like rangers in an in-betweener position, seeing them as good at communicating, translating or negotiating from one side to the other, but not as making knowledge that is powerful in its own right.

The caretakers’ view: Participatory mapping with rangers of high-risk users’ disruptions to Kauri tree forests
to improve biosecurity from the ground

In this paper we show how participatory mapping in focus groups with forest rangers can be used to spatially uncover contextual information relevant to biosecurity at each site, and across a larger managed area. In spatially identifying high risk user groups and producing ‘risk maps’, we assess the methodology’s potential for building a nuanced yet detailed picture of high-risk groups in sensitive forest areas, and its future use in the co-production of targeted biosecurity measures with these groups.

Visual Graphic

Download Graphic

What Does The Ideal Forest Biosecurity System Look Like

This visual graphic was developed for a policy workshop with Auckland Council to outline concerns community had raised about how they would like to be included in biosecurity management for kauri dieback. The research found that when community is excluded, or feel excluded, this develops counter publics and Council are seeing a growing rise in counter publics. The research indicated effective communication could assist in limiting counter publics from developing.
What might this effective communication look like? If the perception of community was that Council’s focus was on eradication this locked people out of the forest. Community would prefer a “living with the disease approach” so how can this be done in ways that are respectful but recognises communities connections to the forest? Council messaging may need to change to more adequately reflect their approach, however notions of pest free and other public campaigns like smoke free and road to zero, promote a ‘zero’ focus. For community this seems both unachievable and alienating which can lead to resentment and the rise of counter publics.