In a first-ever address called “The State of the Science,” National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt, Ph.D., pinpointed the status of scientific research, development, and accomplishments in the United States and recommended that by investing more in science, the U.S. can boost its economy and remain competitive with other nations.
During her presentation June 26 at NAS headquarters in Washington, D.C., Dr. McNutt explained that the United States remains a global science leader by some measurements. For example, the U.S. holds nearly 60% of all Nobel prizes for the sciences and the majority of the Kavli Prizes — the international awards given to scientists for work that has transformed astrophysics, nanoscience, and neuroscience. And the U.S. leads in Nature’s annual top 10 list of scientists whose discoveries help shape science.
But by other metrics, American dominance is waning, she said. For example, while the U.S. spends more overall on research and development, or R&D, than China, China’s rate of increase in spending is twice that of the U.S. and may soon overtake the U.S. China already surpassed the U.S. in the number of patents issued in 2015 and has continued its upward trajectory. “U.S. science is perceived to be — and is — losing the race for global STEM leadership,” Dr. McNutt said.
Footnotes
1 Data are from the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics program, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wage data cover non-farm wage and salary workers and do not cover the self-employed, owners and partners in unincorporated firms, or household workers.
2 Science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) occupations include computer and mathematical, architecture and engineering, and life and physical science occupations, as well as managerial and postsecondary teaching occupations related to these functional areas and sales occupations requiring scientific or technical knowledge at the postsecondary level. For more information, see https://www.bls.gov/oes/topics.htm#stem.
The U.S. needs to lead in science for a number of reasons, she said. Science offers insights into the future that inform strategic planning and produce new products and services that enhance quality of life. And science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, contribute significantly to the U.S. economy. “Technology companies are first in market value among Fortune 500 companies,” she said. Moreover, she added, “STEM is where the jobs are. The total workforce has shifted away from non-STEM employment to STEM employment.”
Leading in science allows the United States to strengthen its national security and, through collaborations with other nations, improve its “soft power and diplomacy,” she added. And strengthening scientific pursuits enables the U.S. to direct the ethical principles and standards that guide such fast-developing technologies as artificial intelligence.
Dr. McNutt highlighted six suggestions for improving U.S. status in the scientific realm:
- Improve K-12 education
- Reduce red tape for foreign students who want to study in the U.S. and graduates who want to stay and work in the U.S.
- Create a national research strategy
- Strengthen partnerships between industry and universities
- Strengthen international partnerships
- Cultivate trust in science
Call to action
In the K-12 realm, schools should avoid approaching science as a list of facts to be memorized, focusing instead on fostering children’s innate curiosity and ability to discover on their own, Dr. McNutt said. In later years, more emphasis should be placed on nurturing the talents and ambitions of historically underrepresented groups. “We underinvest in institutions that develop our underrepresented talent,” she said.
And as more foreign-born students who have come to the U.S. to learn either return to their home countries or move to other places to work, there is the risk of a drain of important STEM talent from the U.S., she said. “We have to make it easier for people to get here and stay here.”
Currently investment in U.S. scientific R&D is led by industry, with significant contributions from philanthropies. Far less investment comes from federal sources than in the past. For this reason, a great deal of R&D goes only toward developing specific products and services, Dr. McNutt said. Less is dedicated to the basic research that often yields unanticipated discoveries. An overarching national strategy would offer opportunities for collaboration between these entities and foster discovery, she said.
Universities should partner with industry and other sectors to boost their R&D resources, she added, but only as long as guardrails exist to prevent conflicts of interest that might undermine the public’s confidence in the outcomes. And collaborations between the U.S. and other countries could help solve global problems.
Reestablishing the public’s trust in science is critical, she added. Scientists need to demonstrate to the public, using all available media, that their research is credible, reliable, free from bias, and critical to inventions that are useful to everyone, Dr. McNutt said.
Experts weigh in
In a panel discussion that followed the presentation, moderated by Harvey V. Fineberg, M.D., Ph.D., president of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, experts discussed these topics in more detail.
Grace Wang, Ph.D., president of Worcester Polytechnic Institute, noted that improving K-12 education is a complex and long-term challenge, but hands-on programs like For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology, or FIRST — which she noted has reached 3.2 million students — can serve as models. “We actually know how to do it,” she said. “There are so many STEM outreach programs across the country. Many are effective. So how do we scale that up?”
James Marshall Shepherd, Ph.D., associate dean for research, scholarship, and partnerships at Franklin College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Georgia, noted that the pipeline analogy for how students arrive at STEM educations and careers is a poor one. It implies only “one way in, one way out,” he said. “There are nontraditional communities, poor communities, irrespective of color, at various levels of socioeconomic rungs that may have a different pathway into STEM,” he said. “So, we need to think about ways of nurturing and broadening that and completely dismantling this idea of a pipeline.”
James Manyika, Ph.D., senior vice president of research, technology, and society at Google and Alphabet, emphasized the need for companies that are driving research to work with historically Black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, and other research institutions aimed at historically underserved communities. “We’ve been doing quite a lot of work with the HBCUs [and] recently announced we’re doing a big collaborative effort with the Thurgood Marshall College Fund to try to invest and build capacity where the research capacity doesn’t exist,” he said.
Dr. Shepherd also pointed out that for scientists to make their case to the public, they must take to social media and emerging information outlets.
Christie Aschwanden, a longtime science journalist and the producer and host of Uncertain, a podcast series from Scientific American, agreed. She said it has become difficult for journalists to convey scientific information and to “break through the new algorithms [used in] social media — which, by the way, is where a lot of people get a lot of their information now about science and health.”
Other panelists were E. Albert Reece, M.D., Ph.D., the endowed professor and director of the Center for Advanced Research Training and Innovation at the University of Maryland School of Medicine; and Stephanie Diem, Ph.D., assistant professor of nuclear engineering and engineering physics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Dr. McNutt expressed confidence that the United States can regain its leadership position in science, saying, “Our country has a remarkable ability to adapt and to learn and to try new things.”
