In New Zealand, the use of genetic technologies for environmental and conservation purposes is a highly contested issue yet genetic technologies, including RNAi and gene drives may offer technological advances for protecting New Zealand's vulnerable biodiversity. This context makes discussions on the use of gene technology for environmental purposes both challenging and necessary. Such discussions can be difficult, not simply because they are often contested, but also because people find the topic complicated, the language alien and overly scientific. This research, which sits at the intersection of science and publics, is part of a large national dialogue which aimed to better understand the public's thoughts and feelings around the use of genetic technologies for environmental or conservation purposes. To assist people to feel comfortable at the beginning of the dialogue sessions, we designed purposeful games before engaging in a facilitated conversation. These games are based on heritage games that most people are familiar with but altered to address several issues relevant to genetic technologies in an environmental context. This article provides an insight into how to design and use purposeful games to foster epistemic confidence in non-scientists. It acts as a helpful guide for others working in contested spaces where there is a need to effectively facilitate engagement of non-scientists in important science-society discussions.

How, as researchers, do we recognise and address the implicit biases when engaging across multiple knowledge ecologies. In this paper, we consider the way historical and epistemic justice and injustice plays into our knowledge making when dealing with a specific issue: forest biosecurity. Specifically, we focus on the Aotearoa New Zealand context where knowledge making has been, and still is, dominated by a western paradigm, but where there is increasing discussion on mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) as a valid and valuable form of knowing. Drawing on the experiences of a transdisciplinary research programme that sought to examine the human dimensions of biosecurity aspects of the plant pathogens kauri dieback and myrtle rust, we approach our original question using the theoretical concept of epistemic injustice and draw on our experiences as a way to highlight instances and forms of epistemic injustice in the science-society relationship. We argue that the division of epistemic labour (into fields, disciplines, etc), and the ranking and assigning of relative epistemic credibility based on this division is a fundamental part of the western knowledge ecology which creates the necessary conditions for specific and potent forms of epistemic injustice. We contrast this by discussing how other knowledge ecologies, specifically mātauranga Māori, comfortably engages with a variety of knowledge and knowers and discuss the possibilities other knowledge ecologies offer.