Dive Brief:
- In its new report, “National Security, the Assault on Science, and Academic Freedom,” the American Association of University Professors warns that troubling threats to academic freedom in the physical and natural sciences have been exacerbated by the hostility to science displayed by members of President Donald Trump’s administration.
- The politicization of science, rooted in anti-intellectualism and propelled by anti-elitist mantras, constrains the free pursuit of knowledge and scientific inquiry and limits the ability of science to serve the public good, the AAUP report warns.
- The AAUP encourages scientists, colleges and universities, scientific associations and others to resist government efforts to unduly restrict or discredit scientific research on grounds of national security. The association also recommends advocates speak out against the politicization of science and to report assaults on science and to work to protect academic freedom.
Dive Insight:
Although challenges to the validity of scientific findings and free pursuit of research began well before President Trump’s rise to office, many within the scientific community view his appointments to key cabinet posts and federal agencies, including the Energy Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and NASA, as antithetical to the institution of science and its role in public policy debates. Congressional efforts to curb scientific work, especially in climate science, also have intensified. Although the U.S. invests the most in research and development, produces the most advanced degrees in science and engineering and provides the most high-impact scientific publications, the trend is shifting eastward, according to a January 2016 report by the National Science Foundation.
In addition to fighting the politicization of science, U.S. higher education institutions should be among those fighting for the continuation of international collaboration in science research, the AAUP report says. For one, experts at the recent Higher Education Government Relations Conference in San Diego pointed to the extreme arrogance of many scientists and researchers and higher ed officials in general. Such a disconnect between the Ivory Tower and surrounding communities fuels a resentment from those who make up Trump's base, and it's something those within the academy must actively work to dismantle. Intentional efforts to communicate research in more accessible terms and showing the public benefit of research would go a long way towards bridging that gap. Some scientists have realized begun to realize this, and a small group is even taking blame for the deteriorating attitudes around research in this country.
The overwhelming U.S. dominance in scientific research at the end of the 20th century has been replaced both by those from other countries coming to study and work in the U.S., and by U.S. scientists and scholars working with researchers from other areas. The National Science Foundation said in 2013 that more than 5 million of 29 million scientists and engineers in the U.S. were born in other countries. And about one in four U.S. Nobel Laureates and one in four members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine immigrated to the U.S. as students or senior scientists. Many scientific papers are produced by researchers from more than one country.
Although international collaboration is necessary, the report notes that “under certain circumstances, academic research can directly affect national security, and in those circumstances, a system of classification may be necessary, as it has been in the past. However, restrictions, if necessary, should be precise, narrowly defined and applied only in exceptional circumstances. Colleges and universities – through faculty committees, contracts and grants, personnel, public relation officers and others – should vigorously defend colleagues in science to continue to support international collaborations.
Autumn A. Arnett contributed to this article.