What’s Happening to Research Funding?

1. What’s Happening to Research Funding? What Can We Do? James L. Turk Simon Fraser University March 25, 2013

3. Identifying the problems Increasing politicization of science Redefining the purpose of federal scientific agencies Fettering funding Focused cuts (e.g. CFCAS, MRS program, ELA) Eliminating surveys and data collection initiatives Partisan appointments to granting council boards Under-funding of basic research and government science, & shifting focus to commercialization Muzzling of scientists Undue industrial influence in university/corporate collaborations

4. National Research Council to 'refocus' to serve business CBC News Posted: Mar 6, 2012 1:58 PM ET  Last Updated: Mar 6, 2012 2:43 PM ET  Canada's national government research and development agency is being transformed and "refocused“ into a service that provides solutions for businesses, Canada's Minister of State for Science and Technology announced Tuesday. Gary Goodyear says he envisions the National Research Council becoming a "concierge" service that offers a single phone number to connect businesses to all their research and development needs.

5. But less support for basic research

6. Less support for open research Source: NSERC, CIHR, SSHRC Departmental Performance Reports, Federal Budget 2012-13

7. Declining success rates Source: SSHRC, NSERC, CIHR

8. Government priorities for research support $10,733,333 was spent on 9 NSERC Canada Excellence Research Chairs in 2010-11 That would have supported 339 researchers with Discovery Grants and reversed the decline in success rates since 2006 $17,833,333 was spent on 13 NSERC CERC Chairs in 2011-12 That would have supported an additional 545 researchers with Discovery Grants that year

9. Examples from

10. Fettered funding within Granting Councils - NSERC Source: NSERC Departmental Performance Reports, Budget 2012-13

11. NSERC Initiatives – examples • Strategy for Partnerships and Innovation “helping to organize ‘speed dating’ events to bring interested researchers and companies into brief and structured contact to discuss needs and capabilities.” http://www.nsercpartnerships.ca/StrategyPartnership-StrategiePartenariats_eng.asp • The Engage Grants (EG) Program is supporting “short-term research and development projects aimed at addressing a company-specific problem.” http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Professors-Professeurs/RPP-PP/Engage-Engagement_eng.asp

12. Engage Grant Program Source: NSERC

13. NSERC Initiatives – more examples • Interaction Grants (IG) provide researchers with travel funds to meet with Canadian based companies in order to identify a company-specific problem they could solve by collaborating in a subsequent research partnership. The company and the researcher must not have worked together before. • Partnership Workshops Grants (PWG) fund workshops that help to build new collaborations between Canadian university researchers and industry and government organizations. The workshops, which must have an academic and non-academic lead, foster the development of partnerships addressing the research and technology needs identified by non-academic organizations that would use the research results.

14. MRC/CIHR Council

15. NSERC Council

16. SSHRC Council

17. Muzzling Government Scientists Dr. Kristi Miller, Head, Molecular Genetics, Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2008 Federal Government Media Protocol:  "Just as we have one department we should have one voice. Interviews sometimes present surprises to ministers and senior management. Media relations will work with staff on how best to deal with the call (an interview request from a journalist). This should include asking the programme expert to respond with approved lines."

18. Muzzling Academic Researchers Prof. Andreas Muenchow Associate Professor Graduate College of Marine Studies, University of Delaware DFO Publication Review Committee Procedures: “All journal articles…must be submitted to your Divison Admin for review and approval prior to being submitted for publication. Publication review procedures apply to all submissions where a DFO Science staff member is an author (whether the single author, or one of multiple co-authors)."

19. Muzzling Librarians & Archivists • “On occasion, LAC employees may be asked by third parties to teach or to speak at or be a guest at conferences as a personal activity or part-time employment. Such activities have been identified as high risk to LAC and to the employee with regard to conflict of interest, conflict of duties and duty of loyalty. • “An employee may accept such invitations as personal activities if all of the following conditions are met: • The subject matter of the activity is not related to the mandate or activities of LAC;… • The third party is not a potential or current supplier to/collaborator with LAC;… • The employee has discussed it with his or her manager, who has documented confirmation that the activity does not conflict with the employee’s duties at LAC or present other risks to LAC.” • -LAC Code of Conduct

20. University Collaborations • Big Oil Goes to College: An Analysis of Contracts between Energy Corporations & U.S. Universities • http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/10/big_oil.html • A detailed examination of 10 university-industry collaborative agreements totalling more than $835 million in confirmed corporate funding (over 10 years) for energy research funding on campus.

21. Similar Study in Canada • Guiding Principles for University Collaborations – CAUT Council 2012 • http://www.caut.ca/uploads/GuidingPrinc_UCollaborationv2.pdf • Examining 13 Canadian University – Third Party Collaborations • Release: April 2013

22. Challenges Raise public awareness about the threats to the public interest as a result of the politicization of science by the federal government, and the undue influence of industry over academic and government research Document and keep an inventory of research programs and projects shut down or put at risk Engage and mobilize CAUT members and other scientists and researchers to speak out on the issue Work with student and postdoc associations, and organizations representing government scientists to encourage their members to add their voices to the public discussion Pressure policy makers and build support for a new comprehensive science policy that puts the public interest and good science and scholarship first

23. Changes sought Invest in basic research Increase core funding of the granting councils Protect the integrity and independence of scholarship and science Projects should be funded on the basis of what is important from a scientific and scholarly perspective, not what is politically motivated Stop the muzzling of scientists – the public has a right to know End partisan appointments to the granting council boards Create a non-partisan Parliamentary Science Officer Rebuild government science Provide necessary funding for government scientific work Ensure university collaborations protect academic integrity

24. Tools and tactics Dedicated web site Interactive map cataloguing cancelled and “at risk” projects Video testimonies and on-line submission forms Email & petition tool Local town halls and regional forums – for researchers to talk with the public Research report on university/corporate collaborationswith tool box for ensuring transparency in any new proposed collaborations Report on granting councils’ priorities and practices Database of researchers and scientists to facilitate advocacy

25. nature editorialChanges to Canadian science raise questions that the government must answer • “Governments come and go, but scientific expertise and experience cannot be chopped and changed as the mood suits and still be expected to function. Nor can applied research thrive when basic research is struggling.” • Nature 487, 271–272 (19 July 2012) • http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/487271b.html