1
In your opinion, how has the current US administration's approach to science funding affected research in your field?
Results
(241 Answers)
The survey responses reveal a strong negative sentiment regarding the current US administration's approach to science funding. 63% of experts reported "very negative" impacts on their research fields, while an additional 13% reported "somewhat negative" impacts. Only 10% of experts indicated positive effects (either "somewhat" or "very" positive), and 14% reported no significant impact or that the question was not applicable to their work.
Among those reporting negative impacts, several key concerns emerged:
- Cancellation of existing grants and research projects
- Disruption to NIH study sections and grant review processes
- Concerns about politically-motivated funding decisions
- Negative effects on early-career researchers and talent pipeline
- Impacts extending beyond US borders to international collaborations
- Particular concerns in environmental, public health, and DEI-related research
The minority reporting positive impacts mentioned reduced "frivolous" research, more efficient use of resources, and some specific field benefits. Several international respondents noted that while not directly affected, the global scientific ecosystem is interconnected, making US funding policies relevant worldwide.
Summary Generated by AI
Answer Explanations
- Very negativelyuser-37077Driving the best minds out of the country or at least out of academia.
- Very negativelyuser-967701Research is being censored based on the topics considered. More people will get sick and die because of it.
- Very negativelyuser-751315It's a "double whammy" as Mammy Yokum would have said. First NIH and university funding in general have cut deeply into antimicrobial innovation, and secondly, foreign investment is drying rapidly as EU and Asian investors have lost faith in the US market.
- Very negativelyuser-475346Reduced enthusiasm for pursuing medical research as a career option, fewer funding applications being submitted because of perceived futility due to cancellation of reviewing study sections or lack of adequate staff numbers to handle the applications, in addition to researchers working on funded projects who lost their funding due to reference in the application to certain scientifically-relevant topics that were not deemed socially/politically appropriate by the administration.
- Very positivelyuser-844210My postdoc contract was cut short
- Very negativelyuser-49719Study Sections of NIH that award grants in an unbiased way are in disarray after meeting were cancelled. Grants ar now awarded based on ideological compliance. Censorship is everywhere.
- Very negativelyuser-240316Funding is being slashed and proposed indirect rate cuts will cripple the research enterprise as we know it.
- Very negativelyuser-548458The Science is not valorized by the present US administration
- Very negativelyuser-577239Research must be indipendent from politics
- Very negativelyuser-755788FDA research on food and packaging safety has been cut.
- Very positivelyuser-546903Anticipate that this will reduce the amount of frivolous, non-productive research in my field.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-776797Some sub-grants have been reduced
- Very negativelyuser-143710My young colleagues who are starting out in medical research are rethinking their research careers in academics.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-657321There was very little research funded in my area by US federal government outside of intramural programs, which lack diversity of perspectives and tend not to be the most innovative.
- Very negativelyuser-553722I research global health. The destruction of the state dept has hugely negatively impacted my research
- Very negativelyuser-59790dramatic cuts to funding and threats to dissolve entire NIH institutes
- No significant impactuser-848733I work in global health but rarely if ever get funding from US sources. The USAID system was very rigged towards a few favorites.
- Very negativelyuser-907622Not only has it significantly cut down research funding, but significant damage has been done in creating an environment of fear where the majority is unwilling to dissent or voice their opinions, which is a real loss in higher education.
- Not applicable to my workuser-255226PScience needs funding. So, it will be affected.
- Very negativelyuser-701806‘Science’ is linked to political opinions and beliefs for the current US administration. Therefore no independent scientific research will be possibly if funded by US government
- Somewhat negativelyuser-89669Here in Europe, the mostly affects the funding indirectly. the stock market has plunged about 5-10% within a few days after the Trumpp administration started to put tolls on everything starting a trading war around the world. that means e.g. for a foundation in which I am in the administration board, we cannot fund as much as before, as we use the interest rates that are about 510% per year based on stock trading. so the new US administration will not only kill the future of many of their own people, but also of millions around the world..
- Somewhat negativelyuser-426958I am in South Africa, and the negative diplomatic sentiments from US towards our country has resulted in no actions on collaborative efforts with US institutions. Our officials are silent, therefore we cannot get approvals to collaborate. We have to shift the effort to work with different states.
- No significant impactuser-426175I am a Hungarian scientist, our area is neglected in the USA.
However, my colleagues inform me about the large incompetence of present US administration. - Somewhat negativelyuser-683654Each country should develop its own method of research funding.
- Somewhat positivelyuser-430707Due to hardship in visa exchange policy as well as reduction in scientific collaboration over all affect the scientific development
- Somewhat negativelyuser-71434The with draw of some support has let some projects abandoned
- Very negativelyuser-555542The US admin's approach to academy and cultural institutions in general is strongly disappointing (e.g. Harvard Univ. funding limitations). Also their approach to climate change and related environmental issues (including carbon footprint, energy, water, etc.) will strongly negatively affect scientific research in this field.
- Not applicable to my workuser-920129I am not in a position to answer this question because I have never been part of any research project that is funded by the USA.
- Very negativelyuser-887203The funding for our research project, which is in the agricultural field, comes from USDA.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-937607Funding for statistics research is often tied to other disciplines/fields which are losing or in fear of losing funding. In addition, government statisticians (USGS, CDC, FDA, etc) carry out research and they are worried about their jobs and constraints on their work.
- Very negativelyuser-761199This administrations attacks on higher education and academic medicine and research will be devastating to our country. Graduate students and post-docs have had their visas revoked, arbitrarily and unlawfully. Grants have been revoked, which effects individuals as well as our country.
- Very negativelyuser-787946It seems science is now a “word to be banned”. Many studies halted. Scientists fired . Moving out of country. Brain drain.
- Very negativelyuser-691334Trump has destroyed one of the pillars of US strength. How can any one collaborate with an American university knowing how capricious the Administration is and how unreliable funding may be?
- Somewhat negativelyuser-869302Regulatory uncertainty (particularly in food safety) has made developers hesitant to move forward.
- Very negativelyuser-861466I know of one major international study involving colleagues has been de-funded. None of my own work is US-funded.
- Very negativelyuser-464698The new approach significantly affect science funding around the globe in one way or another.
- Very negativelyuser-738385The USAID funded project worked on malaria vector bionomics including monitoring insecticide resistance that guides the chemical based vector control. The National Malaria Control Program needs evidence-based decision-making on managing insecticide resistance for effective vector control. The stoppage has left a gap on the status of insecticide resistance.
- No significant impactuser-359641My projects were funded before the change in administration and the funding has been spent.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-827817Cutting funding is always going to have a negative impact, but it isn't fatal. I say don't panic.
- Very negativelyuser-553126Many scientists will have to leave research and teaching. Many will not find jobs. The biomedical professions will suffer in the future. New treatments and discoveries will slow down.Future lives will certainly be lost compared with those expected if the administration has not sever cuts to science funding. Additionally new medical discoveries drive drug discovery and many jobs in the phamaceutical and related industries will be lost. Companies that do business with these pharmaceuticals will lose business, Parts of the economy will suffere
- Somewhat negativelyuser-334263Our research speed has reduced because we can no longer afford to engage consultants to carry out our field surveys
- Very negativelyuser-293230Colleagues have had their research grants cancelled, my department has had three training grants canceled, and I have had trouble getting submitted grants reviewed at NIH study sections and councils.
- Very positivelyuser-740795US government has been a major funder of science research funding especially in the field of helathcare delievery
- Very positivelyuser-884562the current US administration's approach to science funding increases my research interest and increasing fund to finish research in cost effective way
- Very negativelyuser-126332One NSF award was completely cancelled after we had begun work. It supported a DEI-related training project, which is not my core field. However, inasmuch as my actual research area will benefit from a bigger input pipeline for trainees, it does affect the quality of science workforce for my field (and many others). Remember, the opposite of diversity, equity, and inclusion is "homogeneity, unfairness, and exclusion."
- Very negativelyuser-569506I am a public health researcher focused on HIV prevention and LGBTQ+ health. The drastic cuts to research funding and the federal public health workforce, particularly in the areas of HIV prevention, have eliminated or stalled many important studies and services.
- Very negativelyuser-446741I am a public health and chemical/drug safety professional. EPA ORD, NIH, NIEHS, FDA, CDC all have been decimated (ORD threatened with elimination altogether). This is disastrous.
- Very negativelyuser-984622Critical people are losing their jobs due to grants losing funding. Grant funding is chaotic and unreliable. Universities have stopped hiring. Research infrastructure is being threatened due to looming cuts. Tariffs are affecting research supply costs. Students do not have research labs to train in, greatly diminishing the next couple generations of junior scientists. What has happened already will set US science back for years, maybe longer.
- No significant impactuser-93830So far cancer research has not received too much negative publicity.
- Very negativelyuser-935064Gutting EPA effectively ends responsible management of environmental challenges. Without regulatory enforcement, industries will not invest in compliance with environmental laws. This along with withholding funds to universities and threatening research programs will cut off the pipeline of research that leads to innovaitons. Additionally, the excellerating rise in disinformation and missinformation threatens to send us back to the dark ages.
- Very negativelyuser-388091Science has been made to be not fun. We are watching good people either get fired (NIH) or laid off (labs whose grants are cut) or moving out of the country. I've been doing this for 45 years and this is the most damaging thing I've every experienced. It's not done with merit done, its not done with any rationale in mind, no one has any confidence in what is being done, no one knows what is real and what will change, and it is not even done with a business model, which is not the way to do open ended science but at least would have some logic - it is rather done by micromanaging from people who no idea what they are doing. Tell us to cut 40% and let us do it. That would have some sense to it. Everyone is so busy scrambling that american science cannot get done. Their job has been to instill chaos and inefficiency, wasting the precious dollars we fight for to carry out biomedical research - "Department of Government Inefficiency".
- Very negativelyuser-790912I am mostly concerned about the young investigators who are at the beginning of their careers. Their grants are being eliminated and that is problematic. It limits their ability to advance in a tenure track position, to publish and to advance science.
- Very negativelyuser-696023It has been informally before (skewed to the other side, only "bad" news were accepted), but now it is openly impossible to perform risk research.
- Very negativelyuser-107268We are faced with empty shelves due to the tariff war. The trade war impact goes beyond the trading to affect research funds
- Very negativelyuser-362246My research focuses on Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs), a group of infectious diseases that disproportionately affect impoverished communities worldwide. Despite progress made in combating NTDs over the years, recent funding cuts threaten to undermine these gains.
The consequences of reduced funding are far-reaching. Researchers like myself face uncertainty about the future of our work, and the careers we've dedicated to understanding and addressing these diseases. More critically, the most vulnerable populations – those already struggling with the burden of NTDs – will bear the brunt of this funding crisis.
As a result, I am compelled to advocate for sustained support for NTD research and control programs. It is crucial that we prioritize the health and well-being of marginalized communities and protect the progress made against these debilitating diseases. - Very negativelyuser-143325Environmental research is not a priority in this administration. Despite increases in areas like microplastics, wildfires, drought, etc, these areas seem unimportant. In addition, there is an attack on animal research. It is not possible to fully understand mechanisms without animal research.
- Very negativelyuser-104740I am in the health sciences field, and the change to funding and priorities will put back public health and medical research by decades.
- Very negativelyuser-266767The recent suspension of U.S. foreign aid, particularly from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), has significantly impacted Ghana's research and development sectors. This abrupt funding halt has disrupted numerous projects across agriculture, environmental conservation, health, and education, highlighting the country's reliance on external support.
- Very negativelyuser-653570I work in regulatory toxicology, need I say more?
- Very negativelyuser-36916Funding has been withdrawn from important current research, which cannot be replicated elsewhere in the world.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-916060As a founding member of the African Research Security Consortium that was established with the support of the US Department of State, I can attest that out activities and programmes have been adversely affected by the withdrawal of funding
- Somewhat negativelyuser-863938The current U.S. administration's approach to science funding has created uncertainty in research planning and sustainability, particularly due to fluctuating priorities and inconsistent budget allocations. While some areas, like applied biomedical research, have seen boosts, fundamental research and niche fields often face stagnation or reduced support. This imbalance can hinder long-term innovation and collaborative initiatives, especially in highly specialized areas.
- Very negativelyuser-265479Funding has significantly reduced
- Somewhat negativelyuser-510547The Chips ACT and IRA funding allocations are being revisited and scrutinized
- Very negativelyuser-99098Funding is cut, and foreign visitors to the US discouraged.
- Very negativelyuser-640046This US Administration is very ignorant about science, and a generation of scientists will be lost. The world will move on, especially with green energy and electrical vehicles, and the USA will be left behind, without the technology or the know-how.
- Very negativelyuser-293503It's an utter disaster. The blanket defunding of research that deals with race, etc., will basically shut off possibilities for funded research in my field. I recently had a grant terminated, and it was a mess.
- Somewhat positivelyuser-14529The current U.S. administration appears to support research aligned with emerging global challenges such as climate change, cybersecurity, and clean energy. These align with my field’s priorities, particularly in cybersecurity and renewable energy, where increased funding and collaborative opportunities have become more visible. However, the benefits are mostly indirect, as the impact on non-U.S.-based researchers depends largely on the global influence of U.S. research policy and cross-national programs.
- Very negativelyuser-236457fund cut
- Somewhat negativelyuser-625643Work involving travel to the US is impaired by lack of confidence in US government.
- Very positivelyuser-237452The current US administration has demonstrated a generally positive stance toward science funding, with increased allocations to climate research, renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and public health initiatives. In fields related to environmental botany and sustainable agriculture—particularly areas such as soil health, vermicomposting, and plant stress physiology—this has created indirect benefits through greater international collaboration, open-access research opportunities, and funding support for green technologies. Although I am not based in the US, the global scientific ecosystem is interconnected, and these policy shifts help shape research priorities, funding flows, and collaborative networks worldwide.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-952693It has become increasingly clear that the current US administration is moving away from the scientific method. This impact is reflected in declarations of impeachment or restrictions on well-known and prestigious universities. As a consequence, science as a whole suffers directly and indirectly from such restrictions, since many studies supported or even financed within these institutions may miss their deadlines and inputs.
- Very negativelyuser-72077The work-stoppage and cancellation of existing, scientifically rigorous federal grants is having a wide range of negative impacts. In addition to the obvious issues related to personnel, clinical trial stoppages, and stunted scientific progress, we are seeing a "chilling" effect on participation rates for observation epidemiological and public health studies among minoritized and stigmatized populations who are hesitant to report sensitive personal information for fear of disclosure to the government. Although ethical research typically guarantees privacy, the current administration's blatant disregard for ethics and legal limits makes this a more realistic outcome.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-573537The decision of depriving scientific research from government funds affects not only the US, but also abroad, making the only remaining choices, as private funding, the to-go option, however, many private funders may have an undisclosed predisposition to somehow force or skew research towards profit-generating instead of scientific knowledge.
- Very negativelyuser-498299Defunding climate science and environmental science programs while promoting oil and gas industry
- Very negativelyuser-735461Cutting money and funding is always bad for research and researchers all over the world and in all countries.
- Somewhat negativelyuser-531294as above
- Very negativelyuser-271581Problems in getting funding for research, cuts to travel abroad to attend conferences
user-107268
05/07/2025 12:15