logo
Former NSF Director Warns Of Fragile Future For American Science

Former NSF Director Warns Of Fragile Future For American Science

Forbes3 days ago

Dr. France Córdova has held some of the most consequential positions in American science. An astrophysicist with a career spanning four decades, she has served as NASA's Chief Scientist, president of Purdue University, Chancellor of the University of California Riverside, and most recently, Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) — the top federal funder of non-biomedical basic research in the U.S. Today, she leads the Science Philanthropy Alliance, a nonprofit devoted to growing private support for basic science.
That role has placed her at the crossroads of two major forces shaping American research: a federal government increasingly unable or unwilling to fund long-term scientific discovery, and a rising movement in private philanthropy aimed at strengthening the scientific enterprise — even as the long-term sustainability of public funding remains in question.
'All of science is underfunded,' Córdova said in a recent conversation. 'And now we really mean it' — a wry acknowledgment that while greater investment has long been in the nation's economic interest, the situation has deteriorated to the point where even a historically inadequate budget would now be considered a win.
The Science Philanthropy Alliance was established in 2013 by a group of major foundations concerned that years of flat federal budgets had put American science at risk. When Córdova completed her term at NSF in 2020, she joined the Alliance first as an advisor, and soon after as president. Under her leadership, the organization has grown to include around 40 philanthropic partners and played an advisory role in shaping transformative gifts — including a recent major endowment by the Leinweber Foundation to support theoretical physics.
The need for such work, Córdova argues, has never been more urgent.
'Today, a flat budget would be a great budget,' she said. 'Things are going south.'
Córdova is blunt about the risks. The scientific enterprise that helped make the U.S. a global leader after World War II — one built on public investment, open collaboration, and an ethos of discovery — is under pressure from political polarization, disinvestment and short-term thinking. And while philanthropy plays an increasingly important role, she warns that it is no substitute for government support.
'There's this idea that philanthropy and industry can step in to fill the gap,' she said. 'But the numbers just don't add up. Even if every dollar of philanthropy for science went into replacing public funding — which it won't — it still wouldn't be enough.'
This is not just a budgetary concern. The stakes, as she sees them, are existential. Scientific leadership is not a luxury but a national imperative — essential to economic prosperity, public health, national security and cultural vitality. In short, it is part of the scaffolding of a functioning democracy.
'We've come so far,' she said, reflecting on the country's founding ideals and the postwar scientific renaissance that followed. 'It's kind of hard to believe that it could be that fragile, that we could just take it apart by disinvestment.'
Córdova also emphasizes that science holds value far beyond its economic utility. It inspires. It deepens our understanding of ourselves, of our home planet and its many worlds—from deep sea to rainforest to mountaintop — and of our place in the universe. For those who are curious, science offers a way of seeing — a path that leads from wonder through thought to discovery. For Córdova, that path began with a moment of astonishment: watching a television program about neutron stars as a young woman, she was struck by the immensity of the cosmos and felt the pull of a question that would guide her for a lifetime — how does the universe work? 'On a cold, dark night,' she said, 'there's nothing that's more wonderful than going outside and just wondering: what's that up there?'
She worries that by reducing science to its instrumental benefits, we risk losing sight of what draws people into it in the first place — and what sustains it through times of uncertainty.
Córdova remains optimistic about the potential for philanthropy to play a visionary role. The Alliance, she explains, does not direct funding but helps donors identify their passions and connect with institutions equipped to realize their vision. It's a long game — built on trust, shared purpose and a belief in the transformative power of knowledge.
But without renewed public investment, she warns, even the best-coordinated philanthropic efforts will be insufficient.
'We are global leaders [in science],' she said. 'We should be proud of that. But we didn't get here by accident. It has taken nearly a century of effort — and it can be undone much faster than we think.'
As the U.S. confronts challenges ranging from pandemic preparedness to climate change, that warning should not go unheeded.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's travel ban could drive some African nations closer to America's adversaries
Trump's travel ban could drive some African nations closer to America's adversaries

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's travel ban could drive some African nations closer to America's adversaries

Donald Trump's travel ban, a purportedly security-focused measure largely targeting African nations and Muslim-majority countries, underscores his administration's ignorant and potentially destructive approach to a continent with growing global influence. In announcing the ban, Trump said it's meant to ensure the U.S. only allows people to enter who 'do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.' Whereas the Biden administration took steps to ingratiate itself with African leaders and slough off some of the American paternalism that has driven some African nations closer to Russia and China in recent years, Trump's administration seems to have doubled down on an outmoded strategy of exploitation, conspiratorial brow-beating and ostracism. In just the first few months of Trump's second term, his administration has pressured African nations to permit Elon Musk's Starlink internet service to operate within their borders and has sought to use war-torn nations in Africa — including a country known for its human rights abuses — as landing spots for people booted from the U.S. as part of Trump's mass deportation plan. The president also personally turned the Oval Office into a screening room for bigoted conspiracy theories when he invited the president of South Africa to the White House and then bombarded him with false allegations of 'white genocide' being committed in his country. Needless to say, this hasn't helped the U.S. build on its rapport with African nations. And fundamentally, what that could mean for the U.S. is that a continent full of countries that American officials have pinpointed as crucial partners in our geopolitical strategies related to security and commerce could drift further toward our adversaries. That's certainly the vibe given off by the African Union Commission and its dozens of member states, which denounced Trump's travel ban and warned about its potential impacts. 'The Commission remains concerned about the potential negative impact of such measures on people-to-people ties, educational exchange, commercial engagement, and the broader diplomatic relations that have been carefully nurtured over decades. Africa and the United States share mutual interests in promoting peace, prosperity, and global cooperation,' the commission said in a statement, adding: 'The African Union Commission respectfully calls upon the U.S. Administration to consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned.' University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers identified one clear way that Trump's travel ban could harm the American economy. 'One obvious economic implication of the latest travel ban is that genuinely international conferences will no longer be held in the U.S.,' he wrote on X. And that may just be the tip of the iceberg. It's also true that the materials used to make batteries in everything from cutting-edge cars to phones and computers most often come from African mines. Which is to say: Trump's cold shoulder toward African nations could have dire consequences for America's future, particularly with regard to the economy and U.S. national security. This article was originally published on

ISS Conference Scrapped as NASA Budget Cuts Threaten Crew and Cargo
ISS Conference Scrapped as NASA Budget Cuts Threaten Crew and Cargo

Gizmodo

time10 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

ISS Conference Scrapped as NASA Budget Cuts Threaten Crew and Cargo

The International Space Station (ISS) still has a few years left in orbit before it's due for retirement, but the future of the orbital lab is looking a little shaky as NASA is forced to tighten its purse strings. The Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS), which operates the ISS National Lab, is canceling an upcoming space station research conference, SpaceNews reported. The ISS Research and Development Conference was due to be held at the end of July in Seattle, but CASIS announced this week that, after consulting with NASA, 'the current regulatory and budgetary environment does not support holding' the annual conference this year. The announcement comes a little over a month after the release of the current administration's so-called skinny budget, which included funding for NASA in 2026. The budget proposes a $6 billion cut to the agency, 24% less than NASA's current $24.8 billion budget for 2025. The budget also proposes reducing the size of the ISS crew ahead of its planned retirement in 2030, when it's expected to be replaced by multiple commercial space stations. Funding for the ISS could be reduced by a quarter, from $1.24 billion to $920 million, according to the proposed budget for 2026. 'Crew and cargo flights to the station would be significantly reduced,' the budget proposal read. 'The station's reduced research capacity would be focused on efforts critical to the Moon and Mars exploration programs.' During a briefing held in late May, Dana Weigel, NASA's ISS program manager, revealed that the space agency had already been facing resource issues regarding the space station before the 2026 budget proposal. 'The station has been faced with a cumulative multi-year budget reduction,' Weigel is quoted in SpaceNews as saying. 'That's the challenge that I've had that we've been managing through today. That has left us with some budget and resource challenges that result in less cargo.' The cargo includes supplies for onboard crew members. For more than two decades, the space agency has maintained a crew of at least four NASA astronauts on board the ISS, along with international crew members from Russia, Japan, Canada, and other countries. NASA has previously flown four or five cargo missions a year, but the agency has only planned for three drop-offs in 2025. 'We're evaluating the potential for moving to three crew,' Weigel said during the briefing. 'That's something that we're working through and trying to assess today.' NASA is also considering extending the duration of missions on the ISS from six to eight months, Ars Technica previously reported. Meanwhile, five commercial space stations, including Orbital Reef, Axiom Station, and Starlab, are currently in the works but nowhere near being ready to host astronauts in low Earth orbit. The ISS maintains a steady presence of orbital science above Earth's surface, which would leave behind a major gap to fill.

If Viewers Love PBS So Much, Let Them Pay for It
If Viewers Love PBS So Much, Let Them Pay for It

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

If Viewers Love PBS So Much, Let Them Pay for It

Nearly universal support on Capitol Hill for the "big, beautiful bill" is a powerful reminder that Republicans love to run for office on a platform of cutting spending and then immediately betray that promise once they actually have the power to fulfill it. President Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson, and most of the Republican caucus are working tirelessly to pass a budget that would add $2.4 trillion to the deficit. Virtually the only political figures remaining consistent in their opposition to increased spending are Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.), and Elon Musk, who is currently venting his frustration with Trump on X. Suffice it to say, genuine attempts to cut federal spending are unusual. One bright spot, however, is Trump's move to cut funding to publicly subsidized media: National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Libertarians and conservatives have long wondered why the government is in the business of subsidizing news or children's programming, especially when that programming evinces a pro-liberal bias, as was obviously the case with NPR and its president, Katherine Maher. PBS may be marginally more defensible on its own merits, but in the year 2025, it is simply not the case that the channel is meeting some need that the market fails to provide for. YouTube is brimming with high-quality, free (i.e. advertiser-supported) educational content for kids. If Big Bird is a better product, let him stand on his two legs—people will pay to watch him. Defenders of continued taxpayer support for PBS deploy all sorts of counterarguments. But one new development merits a response. A trio of researchers—Christopher Ali, Hilde Van den Bulck, and Jonathan Kropko—published their study, "An island of trust: public broadcasting in the United States," in which they argue that PBS is an atypically trusted source of information, and thus deserves continued public support. In a writeup of their paper, published by Nieman Lab—Harvard University's investigative journalism foundation—the researchers argue that "Americans trust PBS because it's publicly funded, not in spite of it." "Very little seems to unite Americans these days," the authors write. "Trust in government and public institutions is precipitously low. PBS bucks this trend. It is an 'island of trust' in an ocean of what some call 'post-trust' and others call 'post-truth.' It can be the focal point for a renewed spirit of American public discussions, a commitment to journalism, and a platform to recultivate trust." One issue: The study measured trust in PBS, not among all Americans, but among viewers of PBS. That was the sample: survey respondents who themselves watch PBS. This is hardly a surprising finding—and is not whatsoever grounds for public funding. Regular viewers of Fox News, for instance, place very high levels of trust in Fox News. Does that mean all Americans do? Does it mean that Fox News should receive public funding? One doubts that the researchers would agree with such an argument. In any case, they did not respond to a request for comment. For more on Trump's efforts to defund NPR and PBS, read Reason's Jesse Walker. I am joined by Amber Duke to discuss Elon Musk's understandable outrage over Nazi-salute double standards, the attack on Jewish demonstrators in Colorado, Joy Behar's brilliant campaign advice, Stephen Miller clashing with CNN, and Joe Rogan vs. Bono on the U.S. Agency for International Development. I'm waiting to get my Nintendo Switch 2 until I have more free time on my schedule. Right now, I am playing the Mega Man X Legacy collection, which includes the first four games. I've loved these games since I was a kid, though I had forgotten how steep the difficulty curve is. X-1 is pretty easy overall, but I don't understand how you could possibly find all the hidden power-ups in 2 and 3 without help. I've beaten them before, and I still don't remember where to find everything. The post If Viewers Love PBS So Much, Let Them Pay for It appeared first on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store