NAS-AAAS Dual-Use Research Survey Results Released
Today the National Academies of Sciences (NAS) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), released their survey of Attitudes and Actions on Dual Use Research in the Life Sciences. The survey was sent to AAAS members whose primary area of research was in the life sciences in order to assess their awareness of and attitudes toward “dual-use” research-studies undertaken for beneficial purposes that could also have harmful applications. The survey also explored actions the scientists might support to reduce the risk of misuse of research, as well as steps that scientists may already be taking in response to these concerns.
David Franz of the Midwest Research Institute and Ronald M. Atlas of the University of Louisville, two of the members of the committee which reviewed the survey results and wrote the final report presented the main findings. David Franz began by defining dual-use research and its importance within the life sciences community and Ronald Atlas discussed the primary findings of the survey. Atlas noted that a low response rate and uncertainty about whether the sample is representative of the broader life sciences community limits the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Nonetheless, the survey results are useful and informative and Atlas went on to explain that the results indicate that some respondents have already been so concerned about dual-use issues that they have altered their research or experiments. Even in the absence of guidelines or government restrictions some scientists have already taken action to try to avert misuse of biomedical research.
Copies of A Survey of Attitudes and Actions on Dual Use Research in the Life Sciences: A Collaborative Effort of the National Research Council and the American Association for the Advancement of Science are available from the National Academies Press.
Today’s presentation can be heard via podcast from the National Academies website.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.
AI is already consequential, but its future trajectory remains contested. Policymakers should make their assumptions explicit, focus on what can be shaped rather than what can be perfectly predicted, and build institutions that can learn and respond as evidence changes.
From grassroots community impacts to global geopolitical dynamics, understanding developing data center capacities is emerging as a critical analytical challenge.
The last remaining agreement limiting U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons has now expired. For the first time since 1972, there is no treaty-bound cap on strategic nuclear weapons.