Science’s status in the EU, Venezuela and the US

Policy highlights from Science, Nature, and AIP’s FYI

As Research Funding Declines, Chávez, Scientists Trade Charges Science‘s Barbara Casassus investigates the status of science in Venezuela as disaffected scientists say they fear that science funding is becoming more politicized, and declining after broad cuts in funding for research institutes. Recently President Hugo Chávez called on his newly appointed science minister, Jesse Chacón Escamillo—who has scant scientific credentials but has been close to Chávez—to “put the screws” on “feeble scientists” to get better results.

Critics say that research is being mismanaged, and that the government has fired, demoted, or blacklisted dissidents.

The European Parliament and its impact on science-related policy “You can do more for environment legislation in Brussels [at the European Union parliament] through parliamentary committee work than you can in any national parliament,” says Chris Davies, a European MP.

“Although it has no tax-raising powers, it can get things done,” writes Nature‘s Alison Abbott . “And more than any of the other institutions of the EU, it can allow elected individuals to make a difference: personal enthusiasm counts.”

The status of DoD science and technology programs A hearing by a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee provided an overview of the scientific and technological opportunities and challenges facing the Department of Defense and the science community. Among the most important messages: the need for S&T policies and budgets to adjust to changes in today’s battlefields, and to anticipate future war fighting needs says AIP’s Richard M. Jones.

NNSA frozen as Nuclear Posture Review 2010 beckons Jones also reports on the House hearing on the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) which runs the US nuclear weapons complex. Funding for nuclear weapons is flat while the Obama administration decides what to do with the NNSA. There has been some proposal to move the group from the Department of Energy to the Defense deparmtent.

Chairman Peter Visclosky (D-IN) opened the May 21 hearing by describing a changing threat environment and the importance of the forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review :

The Chair for the subcommittee that hosted the hearing, Peter Visclosky (D-IN) is quoted as saying “The national security requirements for a 21st century nuclear force, in a threat environment driven by smaller but very serious multiple threats, are very different from the national security requirements of our legacy nuclear force, which was driven by the bipolar environment of the Cold War. We need to transition to a 21st century force as soon as is economically and technically possible. I urge the Administration to focus on this transition with a clean-sheet approach, free of reflexive ties to the policies of the past. We are waiting for the Nuclear Posture Review to set the framework of this transition.”

Paul Guinnessy