A special livestream event at the 239th ECS Meeting with IMCS18 features representatives of a subcommittee of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Basic Energy Science Advisory Committee (BESAC) reporting on research and requesting input on the future of international scientific research. “Benchmarking Innovation: The Future of International Scientific Research” takes place on June 1, from 1400-1500h EDT after which the content will be available through June 26, 2021. The 239th ECS Meeting with IMCS18 is digital. There is no cost to participate, however pre-registration is required.

Benchmark Study

The BESAC subcommittee is conducting an international benchmark study with the goal of identifying key areas of its mission-relevant research and facility capabilities in which U.S. leadership is most challenged. The presenters will also advise participants on new ways to leverage limited resources and identify incentives to attract and retain scientific talent. The session includes a live panel discussion and moderated Q&A. (more…)

By: Christopher Keane, Washington State University

Emergency: You need more disposable diapers, right away. You hop into your car and trust your ride will be a safe one. Thanks to your phone’s GPS and the microchips that run it, you map out how to get to the store fast. Once there, the barcode on the package lets you accurately check out your purchase and run. Each step in this process owes a debt to the universities, researchers, students and the federal funding support that got these products and technologies rolling in the first place.

By some tallies, almost two-thirds of the technologies with the most far-reaching impact over the last 50 years stemmed from federally funded R&D at national laboratories and research universities.

The benefits from this investment have trickled down into countless aspects of our everyday lives. Even the internet that allows you to read this article online has its roots in federal dollars: The U.S. Department of Defense supported installation of the first node of a communications network called ARPANET at UCLA back in 1969.

As Congress debates the upcoming budget, its members might remember the economic impacts and improved quality of life that past congressional support of basic and applied research has created.

(more…)

By: John C. Besley, Michigan State University; Aaron M. McCright, Michigan State University; Joseph D. Martin, University of Leeds; Kevin Elliott, Michigan State University, and Nagwan Zahry, Michigan State University

A soda company sponsoring nutrition research. An oil conglomerate helping fund a climate-related research meeting. Does the public care who’s paying for science?
In a word, yes. When industry funds science, credibility suffers. And this does not bode well for the types of public-private research partnerships that appear to be becoming more prevalent as government funding for research and development lags.

The recurring topic of conflict of interest has made headlines in recent weeks. The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine has revised its conflict of interest guidelines following questions about whether members of a recent expert panel on GMOs had industry ties or other financial conflicts that were not disclosed in the panel’s final report.

Our own recent research speaks to how hard it may be for the public to see research as useful when produced with an industry partner, even when that company is just one of several collaborators.

What people think of funding sources

We asked our study volunteers what they thought about a proposed research partnership to study the potential risks related to either genetically modified foods or trans fats.

We randomly assigned participants to each evaluate one of 15 different research partnership arrangements – various combinations of scientists from a university, a government agency, a nongovernmental organization and a large food company.

(more…)