#science-policy

#science-policy

We're entering into uncharted territory,

There is hope. Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its coalition partner, the Japan Innovation Party (JIP), have released an agreement that pledges to "substantially expand" grants for scientific research and to "establish a system granting legal effect to the use of maiden names". Both are promising for researchers, but the future of Japanese science will depend on how these policies are implemented.

Around the world, budgets for fundamental research - studies that seek primarily to advance knowledge for its own sake, without an expectation of a return on investment - are coming under pressure to an extent not seen for at least a generation. In the United States, the principal funder of fundamental research, the National Science Foundation, has this year terminated some 1,600 grants worth a total of US$1 billion, a huge chunk of its $10 billion budget.

Good morning. I've spent the week talking to business leaders and policymakers who've gathered in New York for Climate Week, the UN General Assembly and assorted events on the sidelines, including our own. The mood is generally somber, with growing concern about America's commitment to free speech, science, rule of law and remaining a hub for global talent. A few themes have emerged in terms of how CEOs are shifting their strategies.

Major energy producers increased the likelihood and intensity of heatwaves, according to research published in Nature. Using data from an international disaster database, a team developed a methodology to investigate how much anthropogenic climate change had influenced heatwaves. They conclude that many of these events would have been "virtually impossible" without climate change, and that nearly a quarter of the heatwaves recorded from 2000 to 2023 can be directly linked to the greenhouse-gas emissions from individual energy giants.

"The whole ecosystem that we have built around AI, that has been created by federal support, could soon be seriously undermined."

The federal government is filled with scientists who contribute to decisions regarding food, medicines, environment, health care, and more. However, as President Trump's second term began, many scientists noticed a shift towards an antiscience approach.

The executive order promises to ensure that "federal decisions are informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available." In practice, however, it gives political appointees authority to define scientific integrity and decide which evidence counts and how it should be interpreted.

This order promises a commitment to federally funded research that is transparent, rigorous, and impactful, but risks undermining scientific independence by politicizing research evaluation.