Research in the social, behavioral and economic sciences could suffer a 22 percent cut in federal funding if recently proposed legislation is voted into law.
Earlier this month, a House of Representatives committee advanced legislation that if passed will keep the National Science Foundation funding approximately the same but cut deeply into the pool of funding for humanities- and-social-science research. The current $256 million funding level would be reduced to $200 million.
Tom Birkland, associate dean for research and engagement in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, said the proposed legislation would be a “savage cut,” and that CHASS researchers would only receive about 60 percent of the funding they received in 2000.
“It really beats it up,” Birkland said.
Currently, social, behavioral and economic research funding composes a small 3.5 percent of the NSF’s $7.28 billion budget, and Birkland said the proposed changes would save the agency very little money.
“The problem is that sometimes, Congress doesn’t see the point in social-science research,” Birkland said.
Last year, the NSF awarded a group of researchers to study how Native American communities used legal strategies to effect policy change, Birkland said.
“Congress looks at that and thinks, ‘What is the value?’” Birkland said. “They think, ‘Do we want to encourage that?’”
But some things are worth knowing simply for the sake of knowing them, Birkland said.
“Astronomy has little practical benefit,” Birkland said. “Congress rejects certain research on the grounds of ‘fiscal responsibility,’ or other ideological grounds. That’s a legitimate conversation to have in a democracy, but why can’t we pursue the science of sociology as well as biology and astronomy?”
Although N.C. State is one of the most innovative universities, continual cuts to funding are making it harder and harder to contribute to society, according to Terri Lomax, vice chancellor of the office of research, innovation and economic development.
“Behavioral sciences are important at N.C. State, especially in CHASS,” Lomax said. “But that research also impacts the College of Management, the College of Education and The College of Sciences.”
Lomax said the more researchers have to compete for federal funding, the less successful they are in discovering new results because they have to spend more time writing funding proposals.
In response to continual cuts to funding, N.C. State researchers have looked to both industry and government agencies that have not typically provided funding to the campus in the past, such as the Department of Defense, Lomax said.
“We’ve got to get back to being competitive in the U.S. with our federawl funding compared to what’s going on with the other nations across the world,” Lomax said. “If we slip behind, our innovation trade deficit is going to become even worse than it is right now.”
Even though the NSF should roughly keep its current funding level, Birkland said he thinks social science research was targeted because it can sometimes have uncomfortable results.
“Chemicals aren’t offended by results, but research into racism or sexism may bother people, and it makes fodder in the political debate,” Birkland said. “But I think it’s better to know and debate than to put blinders on and not know one way or another.”
If the new funding bill passes Congress, Birkland said the Raleigh area will be “disproportionately hurt,”
“We have three major universities in the Triangle, and constant collaboration goes on within and among those universities,” Birkland said. “We’re an economic powerhouse not just because of the tech sector, but also because of social science research and economic research. These cuts would be bad for the country, but worse for us.”
The legislation now moves to a vote before the full House science committee. The Senate has not yet introduced NSF policy legislation.
