logo
The US has world-class scientific talent. The rest of the world is hoping to lure that away

The US has world-class scientific talent. The rest of the world is hoping to lure that away

Yahoo25-05-2025
As the Trump administration cut billions of dollars in federal funding to scientific research, thousands of scientists in the U.S. lost their jobs or grants — and governments and universities around the world spotted an opportunity.
The 'Canada Leads' program, launched in April, hopes to foster the next generation of innovators by bringing early-career biomedical researchers north of the border.
Aix-Marseille University in France started the 'Safe Place for Science' program in March — pledging to 'welcome' U.S.-based scientists who 'may feel threatened or hindered in their research.'
Australia's 'Global Talent Attraction Program,' announced in April, promises competitive salaries and relocation packages.
'In response to what is happening in the U.S.,' said Anna-Maria Arabia, head of the Australian Academy of Sciences, 'we see an unparalleled opportunity to attract some of the smartest minds here.'
Since World War II, the U.S. has invested huge amounts of money in scientific research conducted at independent universities and federal agencies. That funding helped the U.S. to become the world's leading scientific power — and has led to the invention of cell phones and the internet as well as new ways to treat cancer, heart disease and strokes, noted Holden Thorp, editor-in-chief of the journal Science.
But today that system is being shaken.
Since President Donald Trump took office in January, his administration has pointed to what it calls waste and inefficiency in federal science spending and made major cuts to staff levels and grant funding at the National Academy of Sciences, the National Institutes of Health, NASA and other agencies, as well as slashing research dollars that flow to some private universities.
The White House budget proposal for next year calls to cut the NIH budget by roughly 40% and the National Science Foundation's by 55%.
'The Trump administration is spending its first few months reviewing the previous administration's projects, identifying waste, and realigning our research spending to match the American people's priorities and continue our innovative dominance," said White House spokesperson Kush Desai.
Already, several universities have announced hiring freezes, laid off staff or stopped admitting new graduate students. On Thursday, the Trump administration revoked Harvard University's ability to enroll international students, though a judge put that on hold.
Research institutions abroad are watching with concern for collaborations that depend on colleagues in the U.S. — but they also see opportunities to potentially poach talent.
'There are threats to science ... south of the border,' said Brad Wouters, of University Health Network, Canada's leading hospital and medical research center, which launched the 'Canada Leads' recruitment drive. 'There's a whole pool of talent, a whole cohort that is being affected by this moment.'
Promising a safe place to do science
Universities worldwide are always trying to recruit from one another, just as tech companies and businesses in other fields do. What's unusual about the current moment is that many global recruiters are targeting researchers by promising something that seems newly threatened: academic freedom.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said this month that the European Union intends to 'to enshrine freedom of scientific research into law.' She spoke at the launch of the bloc's 'Choose Europe for Science' — which was in the works before the Trump administration cuts but has sought to capitalize on the moment.
Eric Berton, president of Aix-Marseille University, expressed a similar sentiment after launching the institution's 'Safe Place for Science' program.
'Our American research colleagues are not particularly interested by money," he said of applicants. "What they want above all is to be able to continue their research and that their academic freedom be preserved."
Too early to say 'brain drain'
It's too early to say how many scientists will choose to leave the U.S. It will take months for universities to review applications and dole out funding, and longer for researchers to uproot their lives.
Plus, the American lead in funding research and development is enormous — and even significant cuts may leave crucial programs standing. The U.S. has been the world's leading funder of R&D — including government, university and private investment — for decades. In 2023, the country funded 29% of the world's R&D, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
But some institutions abroad are reporting significant early interest from researchers in the U.S. Nearly half of the applications to 'Safe Place for Science' — 139 out of 300 total — came from U.S.-based scientists, including AI researchers and astrophysicists.
U.S.-based applicants in this year's recruitment round for France's Institute of Genetics, Molecular and Cellular Biology roughly doubled over last year.
At the Max Planck Society in Germany, the Lise Meitner Excellence Program — aimed at young female researchers — drew triple the number of applications from U.S.-based scientists this year as last year.
Recruiters who work with companies and nonprofits say they see a similar trend.
Natalie Derry, a U.K.-based managing partner of the Global Emerging Sciences Practice at recruiter WittKieffer, said her team has seen a 25% to 35% increase in applicants from the U.S. cold-calling about open positions. When they reach out to scientists currently based in the U.S., 'we are getting a much higher hit rate of people showing interest.'
Still, there are practical hurdles to overcome for would-be continent-hoppers, she said. That can include language hurdles, arranging childcare or eldercare, and significant differences in national pension or retirement programs.
Community ties
Brandon Coventry never thought he would consider a scientific career outside the United States. But federal funding cuts and questions over whether new grants will materialize have left him unsure. While reluctant to leave his family and friends, he's applied to faculty positions in Canada and France.
'I've never wanted to necessarily leave the United States, but this is a serious contender for me,' said Coventry, who is a postdoctoral fellow studying neural implants at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
But it's not easy to pick up and move a scientific career — let alone a life.
Marianna Zhang was studying how children develop race and gender stereotypes as a postdoctoral fellow at New York University when her National Science Foundation grant was canceled. She said it felt like 'America as a country was no longer interested in studying questions like mine.'
Still, she wasn't sure of her next move. 'It's no easy solution, just fleeing and escaping to another country,' she said.
The recruitment programs range in ambition, from those trying to attract a dozen researchers to a single university to the continent-wide 'Choose Europe' initiative.
But it's unclear if the total amount of funding and new positions offered could match what's being shed in the U.S.
A global vacuum
Even as universities and institutes think about recruiting talent from the U.S., there's more apprehension than glee at the funding cuts.
'Science is a global endeavor,' said Patrick Cramer, head of the Max Planck Society, noting that datasets and discoveries are often shared among international collaborators.
One aim of recruitment drives is to 'to help prevent the loss of talent to the global scientific community,' he said.
Researchers worldwide will suffer if collaborations are shut down and databases taken offline, scientists say.
'The U.S. was always an example, in both science and education,' said Patrick Schultz, president of France's Institute of Genetics, Molecular and Cellular Biology. So the cuts and policies were 'very frightening also for us because it was an example for the whole world.'
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Kamala Harris back in national spotlight as James Comer floats subpoena in Biden 'cover-up' probe
Kamala Harris back in national spotlight as James Comer floats subpoena in Biden 'cover-up' probe

Fox News

time4 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Kamala Harris back in national spotlight as James Comer floats subpoena in Biden 'cover-up' probe

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is back in the national spotlight with her forthcoming book about her short-lived 2024 White House campaign, and she is generating a buzz about whether she'll try again in 2028. While politicos are keenly watching Harris for her next moves, she's also being eyed by House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., who is investigating whether top Biden administration officials covered up evidence of a mental decline in former President Joe Biden. Comer all but guaranteed his committee would be contacting Harris during an appearance on "The Ingraham Angle" last week. He joined Fox News Channel just after Harris announced she would not be running for governor of California, as some have speculated, and will instead embark on a listening tour to hear from Americans and try to boost fellow Democrats across the country. "I think that that's another great thing about Kamala Harris not running for governor – she's gonna have more time to come before the House Oversight Committee and testify about Joe Biden's cognitive decline," Comer said. "So I think that the odds of Kamala Harris getting a subpoena are very high." During a recent appearance on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert," Harris distanced herself from any immediate electoral ambitions. She emphasized she wanted to hear from all voters, however, not necessarily ruling out a future presidential run. "I believe, and I always believed, that as fragile as our democracy is, our systems would be strong enough to defend our most fundamental principles. And I think right now that, they're not as strong as they need to be," Harris said. "And I just don't want to for now, I don't want to go back in the system. I want to, I want to travel the country. I want to listen to people. I want to talk with people. And I don't want it to be transactional, where I'm asking for their vote." Jonathan Turley, a Fox News contributor and professor at George Washington University Law School, told Fox News Digital the optics of a congressional subpoena would be less than ideal for a potential 2028 candidate. "This is a tough question for Harris, who clearly has aspirations to run again," Turley said when asked if he would advise Harris to appear. "The committee can compel her to appear. However, the optics of forcing a subpoena are not exactly optimal for someone who wants to run again for this office." He added, however, that Harris would be a "natural" target for Comer's probe. "Harris held a unique spot within the inner circle of the White House," Turley said. But both he and former House Oversight Committee ChairTrey Gowdy, R-S.C., now a Fox News Channel host, were doubtful that bringing Harris in would yield much new information. "Is it worth investigating? Absolutely. Is it worth getting her take on it? Yeah. Is she going to cooperate? No," Gowdy told Fox News Digital. The former South Carolina congressman, who also served as a federal prosecutor, predicted that Harris' lawyers would seek to bury any potential appearance in a quagmire of legal proceedings stemming from executive and/or presidential privilege claims. "That privilege has been invoked by both parties repeatedly during congressional investigations," Gowdy said. "Leaving the names out of it, just for the sake of an analogy, I can't think of an advisor that would be closer to a president than his or her vice president. So, by the time you're litigating the issue of whether or not you can compel a vice president to talk about conversations that he or she had with a chief of staff, with a spouse, with the president, with the president's physician – you'll be as old as I am by the time that's litigated." Turley said House investigators would have to be armed with "specific" questions to avoid someone like Harris being able to answer with "a matter of opinion." Gowdy agreed Harris was a "legitimate" witness to bring in and that the issue of Biden's autopen use, particularly for pardons, "warrants further scrutiny." He warned, however, that a potent subpoena comes with consequences for noncompliance. "Prosecutors can send cops and have [people] brought in. Congress can't do that. Judges can send the marshals or the sheriff's deputies out to bring a witness in if the witness is recalcitrant. Congress can't do that," Gowdy said. "So your power is only as good as what you can do to enforce it." A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment on Comer's subpoena threat when reached by Fox News Digital. Spokespeople for Harris and House Oversight Committee Democrats did not return requests for comment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store