How Trump's budget could affect basic research
Michael Kosterlitz is no stranger to rejection, especially when it comes to government funding.
His work in physics has earned him a distinguished post at Brown University and the 2016 Nobel Prize 鈥� but he鈥檚 been turned down so many times by the National Science Foundation that he says he has 鈥済iven up鈥� entirely on NSF grants.
The system that already turns away Nobel Prize winners may get even more competitive, as the聽聽proposes historic cuts to America鈥檚 research and development efforts. If adopted by Congress, leaders in the science community worry the austerity measures could deepen what some already consider an ongoing research crisis with lasting effects on the nation鈥檚 well-being.聽
鈥淲ithout continuing advances driven in part by federal R&D, we will suffer economically, we will suffer in the health domain, we will suffer in the security domain,鈥� says John Holdren, senior science advisor during the Obama administration.聽
The Trump administration鈥檚 proposed budget would reduce total research funding by almost 17 percent in 2018,聽. Among the cuts, an 11 percent reduction to the NSF and a 21 percent reduction to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget below omnibus funding levels stand out for those agencies鈥� wide-reaching and irreplaceable roles in basic research and medicine.聽
Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney told reporters last week that the Trump administration was looking to cut back on the previous administration鈥檚 runaway spending, especially around climate science.
聽鈥淒oes it mean that we are anti-science? Absolutely not,鈥� he told reporters. 鈥淲e are simply trying to get things back in order to where we can look at the folks who pay the taxes and say, 鈥楲ook, yeah, we want to do some climate science, but we鈥檙e not going to do some of the crazy stuff the previous administration did.鈥� 鈥�
But science community leaders say that the broadcloth slashing of NSF and NIH budgets would undermine the nation鈥檚 position as a global leader in science, technology, and medicine.
Pillars of US scientific prowess
Together the agencies have backed the work of more than 300 Nobel Prizes, played聽聽in the development of familiar technologies such as MRI machines, LASIK laser eye surgery, bar codes, and fiber optic cables, and illuminated both the darkness of space and the depths of the ocean.
Despite funding聽, they now face cuts Dr. Holden calls 鈥渄ebilitating,鈥澛燼nd that Joanne Carney, director of government relations for the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) says would 鈥渄evastate much of the federal science and technology enterprise.鈥�
But Holden says it鈥檚 too early to panic: 鈥淲e need to remember, before we completely tear our hair out, that this is just the administration鈥檚 proposal.鈥� Ultimately, the buck stops with Congress, who he says has historically been quite supportive, especially of the NIH. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 expect that Congress will accept a 20 percent cut.鈥�
Yet even if Congress declines the administration鈥檚 request, no one is expecting a sudden windfall for the sciences. Recognizing shifting priorities, the聽聽of $6.65 billion undercut its 2016 funding by more than a tenth.
The White House proposal offers half a billion dollars below that requested level.
And competition for that selective investment is already fierce, with one in five NSF proposals and one in six NIH proposals winning funding. Some say an even more selective review process would raise the quality of the funded projects, but Ms. Carney of AAAS finds this suggestion 鈥渉ighly unlikely,鈥� as grant committees already turn away many highly scoring proposals.
With so many basic research proposals already going unfunded, and other researchers despairing of winning what鈥檚 becoming more lottery than聽competition, some fear even more high-impact projects may be slipping through the cracks. You 鈥渏ust hope that if one has a brilliant idea, one鈥檚 situation is such that one can pursue it independently,鈥� says Professor Kosterlitz.聽
And when the lean research budget squeezes scientists, they have no choice but to seek out that independence.聽聽of 3,700 researchers representing diverse disciplines found that more than half had turned away young scientists interested in joining their labs, and nearly one in five were considering moving abroad to continue their work.聽
What鈥檚 more, cuts to federal investment in basic research sends a message to young people about the value that the nation places on the scientific process and could drive budding scientists into other careers, says Holdren.
The loss of scientific talent to other fields and other countries could have聽long-term聽consequences that ripple beyond universities and labs into the nation鈥檚 economy, security, and position as a global leader of innovation, says NSF director France C贸rdova.
Unforeseen benefits
The seemingly bizarre questions that basic research answers change the world in ways that scientists can鈥檛 even begin to imagine when drafting funding requests.聽
Wondering what colliding black holes look like led to the聽, and curiosity about how microbes survive in boiling hot springs gave rise to a聽. Even Charles Townes was told to聽聽just four months before completing the first laser.
The collaborative and open nature of聽basic聽research makes its economic effects hard to measure, but one survey of industry leaders concluded that聽聽new commercial products relies on academic research, representing a return on investment of nearly 30 percent.
And while industry and academia have been聽聽in recent years, experts say no one can fully replace the government鈥檚 role.聽
鈥淭he researchers we support explore fundamental scientific concepts, many of which have the potential to revolutionize industries,鈥� says Dr. C贸rdova. 鈥淭ypically, businesses cannot justify using their resources for such undirected, uncertain exploration. But without NSF-supported basic research, the private sector would suffer.鈥�
Holdren agrees that companies can鈥檛 pick up all the slack: 鈥淭he risks are too great, the returns are too uncertain, the time scales are too long.鈥� After all, what cloud computing company could have realized the聽聽lay in how honey bees gather pollen?聽
While the NSF may fund the聽, in 2016 alone it also produced a stronger material for artificial hips, the first thousand-core computer chip, and a mathematical crime forecasting model already at work in 50 police departments worldwide. And that鈥檚 even after turning away more than 30,000 proposals, whose potential may never be known.
鈥淭he nature of research and discovery is difficult to predict and may take decades before the benefits are realized. It involves taking risks and embracing a willingness to fail sometimes,鈥� says Dr. Carney of AAAS.
