US science funding freeze a 'threat to academic freedom'

Scientists in the US are in a state of confusion and panic after the Trump administration issued an order freezing billions in federal research funding last week. 

The administration walked back its planned halt of federal grants and loans within two days, but a review of thousands of federally-funded programs continues. A pause on research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) remains in place.

The NIH is the world's largest biomedical institution, providing more than $40 billion (€38.7 billion) annually to health research. It funds more than 300,000 researchers at more than 2,500 universities and other research institutions, primarily in the US.

Owing to concerns that further NIH research funding could be denied for speaking out against the Trump administration's actions, one scientist from Harvard University spoke to DW on condition of anonymity.

"It's chaos, really scary. It's a threat to academic freedom. Many scientists and technicians are panicking and don't know if they can have a future in research," the source said.

Kenneth Evans, an expert in science and technology public policy at Rice University, Texas, said the Trump administration has now made the US "a hostile place for researchers."

"There is no good news for US science. Coupled with the attacks on [the job security of] civil servants, thousands of which are scientists, the Trump administration has made the United States a hostile place for researchers," he said.

Long-term impact on US science

The funding freeze came in a package of executive orders that US President Trump signed on January 27.

The orders are designed to shift policies on several scientific issues, including climate and public health. They also aim to cut the government workforce, which includes scientists.

While a federal court order on January 31 directed agencies to resume spending, the debacle will have a detrimental impact on US science in the long term, said Evans.  

"US colleges and universities are treading lightly, revising and shutting down programs and curricula that might run against Trump's orders," said Evans.

Meanwhile, scientific progress continues elsewhere in the world. Evans said there is already evidence that "students and scientists suffering from the new rules are looking to greener pastures abroad for their education and employment."

"If the Trump administration wants to strengthen American leadership in science and tech, there is little evidence it is taking that promise seriously," he said.

'Government efficiency' damaging US science

The funding freeze brought scientific research to a standstill in research labs all across the US.

While most research has now resumed, it remains unclear which federal grants are unfrozen. Many scientists are still in limbo, waiting to hear if they will receive the research funding they were already awarded, according to the anonymous source, who also told DW the Trump administration's actions have already delayed important scientific and medical breakthroughs.

"You need basic science to guide the future of research and technologies. If scientists don't trust the ground under their feet, how can they do their work?" the source said. "Scientific experiments are planned out for months or years in advance. If funding is stopped or not renewed, it impacts years' worth of research efforts."

Like many of the Trump administration's new federal funding cuts, the funding freeze will also reverse years of progress improving diversity in public institutions.

"Representation across scientific research is imperfect, so we're trying to improve diversity and better representation in academia," the source explained. The US government is now reviewing which NIH-funded programs will continue to receive federal funding.

As part of the review, agencies will have to answer a series of questions for each program, including whether the programs fund diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) frameworks, support undocumented immigrants or include gender references  banned by recent executive orders.

What next for US science?

Evans said he is concerned about the long-term future of US scientific institutions as pillars of the country's soft power abroad.

"Federal science agencies, NSF [National Science Foundation] and NIH in particular, are the gold standard internationally for supporting research and innovation," he said.

"Trump's withdrawal from WHO [World Health Organization] and the Paris Accord add fuel to this fire, opening a window for other science powerhouses, particularly in Europe and China, to lead in public health and climate innovation. "

Science needs a "seat at the table" if it's able to survive the administration's aggressive reforms to grant funding and scientific exchange, he argued. 

The scientific community is placing its hopes on Michael Kratsios, Trump's nominee to lead the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, who currently awaits Senate confirmation. 

"If his voice is crowded out among the Elon [Musk] acolytes and budget hawks, the next four years will test the limits of how much damage American science can take before it cedes leadership to more supportive — and welcoming — nations," said Evans.

This article has been updated for clarity.

Edited by: M Ward Agius