Science and Technology Must Deliver for the Public
For generations, the American science and technology enterprise has been a quiet engine of prosperity and security that has long enjoyed strong public support.
American research and development has helped cure diseases and keep us healthy. It has powered energy, agriculture, and transportation technologies that are transforming today’s economy. It has helped keep us safe from threats–both military and biological. And the majesty of American science goes beyond crucial technological breakthroughs like the internet and GPS; it has also formed the largely invisible infrastructure Americans rely on every day–from weather forecasts to economic data—to make decisions about their lives and livelihoods.
Today that enterprise stands at a serious inflection point.
And despite trust in science and individual scientists remaining relatively high, the public is increasingly distrustful of scientific institutions and decision-making, and has growing skepticism about whether investments in science deliver tangible positive impacts. Communities are asking harder questions about who benefits from research, how decisions are made, and whether innovation is improving their daily lives. And many Americans, including elected leaders, unfortunately seem to have given up on the idea of scientific progress as a shared national priority between the public and the institutions it depends on to deliver that progress.
The hard truth is that this erosion in trust is understandable. Decades of underinvestment in scientific programs have taken a toll, and there are real structural challenges that dedicated scientists and institutions have been contending with for some time. The political seesaw and technological acceleration in recent years has only made it clearer that the American research system was largely built for last century’s world. The National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy were founded more than 70 years ago. Grand scientific challenges like the Apollo Program and the Human Genome Project that spurred so much innovation and growth in yesteryear lack current analogues.
The challenges we face today, from governance of artificial intelligence and biotechnology to protecting energy security and community health, demand a national science and technology apparatus that is more responsive, more inclusive, and more clearly connected to the everyday lives of people across this country. This means going beyond defending science as an abstract idea, and doing the hard, messy work of improving how it functions, and reinvigorating its connection to Americans’ everyday lives and livelihoods.
Few would argue that federal research policy should remain fixed, or that the government’s relationship with research institutions should never evolve. But there is a difference between reform that strengthens the system and change that weakens its capacity to deliver the groundbreaking science and world-leading technology we say we want. A recently proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rule is a case in point: advertised as a step toward efficiency and transparency, it has been widely criticized by the institutions that carry out federal research as a threat to their ability to do the work at all. When change weakens the country’s ability to make discoveries and deliver technologies that improve people’s lives, it erodes the public trust our system needs to function.
The need for reform that rebuilds public trust is why the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) and the Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC) have launched a new “Engaged Science + Technology Policy” initiative focused on a central idea: science works best when it works for everyone. Our goal is not simply to defend federal research investments (though those investments remain vital). Nor is it to retreat into familiar talking points that simply insist that “science is good.” Instead, we are working to ensure that science and technology policy is shaped by real public input, focused on good-faith reform, and grounded in tangible benefits for communities nationwide.
We also aim to create space for lawmakers of all stripes to champion research and innovation without fear of stepping into a partisan minefield. That requires developing and advancing policy ideas that acknowledge where reform is needed, like modernizing grant processes and improving public engagement in technology development, while preserving what has made American science the envy of the world.
Our partnership brings together two organizations with distinct, but complementary, superpowers: FAS specializes in surfacing and honing actionable science-based public policy ideas into vehicles for real-world impact, while ASTC brings expertise in connecting with science-engaged communities and individuals at museums and science institutions around the country. Our project will bring together more science and tech-minded organizations from across ideologies and disciplines to coalesce around our shared interests and bridge across our differences. We may not always find consensus, but we will improve our understanding of each other and work more effectively because of it. The future of our science and technology ecosystem demands more engagement from and interaction between individuals and institutions that perform research and drive innovation. These connections are what allow us to not only speak forcefully against proposals that will make the system weaker, but also surface the best ideas to reinvigorate it for future generations to come.
The rapid and radical new changes across government and science have pushed many to defend the familiar, longstanding systems without meaningfully investigating where they are limiting innovation and falling short on positive impact for the American populace. We have seen meaningful bipartisan discussions around improving the transparency of indirect costs for research facilities. Research security stands ready to be right-sized. Implementation and deployment of massive science programs could be reaping us more benefits. The process for reviewing research grants could position public impact more front and center. Compliance requirements have multiplied exponentially over decades without evidence that the vast majority of these new rules and regulations attached to federal grantmaking actually improve outcomes. Grantees are now often spending more time on compliance than on their actual work – and that means Americans are getting a bad deal. Now is the time to engage in good-faith reforms to address these issues and maximize tangible impacts on American lives and reestablish our position as a global leader in innovation.
It’s also essential that the conversations about science and technology policy move beyond the Beltway. This isn’t just a political problem – it’s a practical one. Communities across America, including farmers, small business owners, teachers, community health workers, and parents, experience the impacts of science and technology policy decisions acutely, regardless of their proximity to Washington.The lack of proper public engagement has resulted in a system whose results do not translate into outcomes that are apparent, or relevant, to all people.
One key starting point is an ASTC specialty – meeting Americans who care most about science in communities where they live. ASTC’s membership includes museums and science education hubs all across the country that focus on public engagement in ways that should inform how we refresh the national conversation around the scientific enterprise. Together, FAS and ASTC are working to connect local priorities with federal policy development by conducting listening sessions, community partnerships, policy sprints, and open calls for ideas. Science centers and museums are surfacing community concerns and aspirations. Policy entrepreneurs are translating those insights into actionable proposals that can be implemented into laws and rules. Our work has already begun in states like Colorado, where we’re championing this approach and surfacing S&T policy ideas directly from the local public and developing them into actionable policies.
Americans deserve to see clearly how federal research investments drive better health care, stronger local economies, resilient infrastructure, and new opportunities for their children. They deserve communication that is honest about tradeoffs, open to reform, and confident about the promise of innovation. At the same time, there needs to be an understanding about what we can and cannot expect to see out of scientific investments. The cost of supporting science and technology infrastructure is massive, and the benefits and outcomes are not always crystal clear. We all need to be clear-eyed and forthright about that ambiguity as we rebuild trust and belief.
The next era of American science and technology will not be secured by nostalgia for past bipartisan consensus. It will be secured by demonstrating that science and technology deliver real, measurable public impact and that our leaders of today, while broader in ideology than ever, are committed to shared responsibility for getting us there.
The United States has never lacked for scientific ambition. What we need now is a renewed civic commitment to ensuring that talent is harnessed for the benefit of all people.
Science can work for everyone. Join us as we build a broader coalition committed to that vision.
Daniel Correa is Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists.
Christofer Nelson is President and Chief Executive Officer of the Association of Science and Technology Centers.
The United States’ biosecurity governance system is structurally incapable of detecting and responding to certain classes of threats. U.S. biosecurity tools have not kept pace with technological advancements or a changing threat landscape.
The United States has never lacked for scientific ambition. What we need now is a renewed civic commitment to ensuring that talent is harnessed for the benefit of all people. Science can work for everyone. Join us as we build a broader coalition committed to that vision.
The United States federal government invests nearly $150 billion annually in research and development. However, the supporting evidence generates wildly different estimates depending on the methods and available data.
The digital government field has an opportunity to build a more responsive and resilient government by pushing into new frontiers, with new tools, approaches, and even organizations that don’t exist yet. This is the time for radical experimentation, delivery, and exploration.