Science And Society Dialogues

🌍 How can humanity continue to develop without destroying the foundations of life on Earth? A major new study, co-authored by the PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, charts a scientific path forward — and warns of the cost of inaction. Business-as-usual leads to ongoing deterioration in climate, biodiversity, freshwater, and nutrient cycles. But when ambitious climate policy is paired with systemic sustainability measures — like shifting to a low-meat diet, halving food waste, reforesting land, and managing water and nutrients efficiently — the damage can be halted, even reversed. By 2050, the planet can return to 2015-level conditions. By 2100, Earth systems could begin to recover significantly. 🧭 This study combines the planetary boundaries framework with integrated climate models to create a navigation system for decision-makers. At the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), we emphasize the power of climate services — turning science into actionable policy — to help countries and companies manage these risks, anticipate disruptions, and build long-term resilience. We need coordinated global action, driven by data and grounded in science. Because protecting our future means safeguarding the systems that sustain life. The tools are here. The science is clear. The time is now. https://lnkd.in/eVuR9yDu

Six of nine planetary boundaries are breached, yet we are still far from bending the curves back to safety. The boundaries interact, and the most critical link is between climate and biodiversity. Even a full energy transition to a fossil-free economy by 2050 won’t keep us below 1.5°C unless we also commit to staying within the safe space for biodiversity. The good news: we have the solutions. Technologies exist and are scalable, what’s missing is speed. Acceleration is key. Our most urgent focus should be the ocean. It is the final victim of multiple planetary crises, suffering from nutrient pollution, excess heat, and rising CO₂ levels. But it can also be a major part of the solution. The ocean will ultimately determine whether we secure a livable future for humanity. It's time to turn the tide. https://lnkd.in/ejkFva6D

Working with an interdisciplinary team, we have developed a website to communicate how the White House's proposed cuts to health research would cause losses of $16B and 68,500 jobs. Find out how your community may be impacted at SCIMaP: https://scienceimpacts.org As context, on Feb. 7th, 2025, the White House ordered across-the-board cuts to NIH funded research. The order drastically reduces the amount that universities/hospitals/institutes receive for essential facilities, services, and staff required for health research. Nearly two dozen states and allied institutions sued leading to a temporary injunction to across-the-board cuts nationwide. The NIH distributes approximately $37B in external grants/awards in FY 2024. These grants/awards have a force-magnifying effect, generating $2.56 of economic activity for each $1 supported, i.e., more than $94B in activity and more than 400K jobs (source: United for Medical Research). But this impact is hard to see and interpret. You might wonder: perhaps the impacts are focused only on a few, potentially 'elite' institutions? The answer is far different. Soon after the executive order was released, it became apparent that these across the board cuts would have damaging & consequential effects in communities across the United States, in places like State College, PA, Birmingham, AL, and across the medical research infrastructure of Texas. Led by the efforts of Allie Sinclair joint with Emily Falk, Clio Andris and more, we have developed an interactive visualization of the impact of federal cuts to health research in communities nationally. In practice, we take anticipated reductions in NIH supported grants and then leverage US census data on commuting to project the impact of these cuts across and within communities. Through interactive, data-driven visualizations, we aim to help Americans explore how research fuels the economy, supports jobs, and improves health outcomes. This website and interactive visualization is a step in that direction, with more to come joint with Alyssa (Allie) Sinclair (now at UPenn), Emily Falk (UPenn), Clio Andris (GT) + others in The Science and Community Impacts Mapping Project: https://scienceimpacts.org

In 1966, two scientists got an $80,000 grant from the U.S. government to study microbes in Yellowstone’s hot springs. They basically went around sticking slides in hot mud to eventually prove for the first time that life could exist at such high temperatures. It sounded like obscure science for science's own sake—maybe even like a waste of taxpayer money. But from that research, they discovered a heat-resistant enzyme that years later became the foundation of PCR (polymerase chain reaction). PCR made it possible to rapidly copy DNA—an innovation that revolutionized genetic science. Processes that were either impossible or took teams of experts months were suddenly doable in a few hours. Fast forward decades, and because of that single grant: 🧬 The Human Genome Project was possible. 🧬 We mapped genes like BRAF, including the rare gene mutation I have. 🧬 We developed targeted therapies like Mekinist, designed to interrupt the exact signaling pathway my mutation hijacks. That random federal $80K grant? It led to me not dying. If the U.S. government doesn't invest $80,000 in scientists playing in the geiser mud at Yellowstone over 50 years ago, doctors today wouldn't be able to accurately diagnose diseases like mine and treatment might be limited to blunt, aggressive chemo and the hope 🤞 that it would be effective. Investing in science and research is precisely what makes our country great. Haphazardly eliminating federal grants will weaken our greatest strengths, and could literally result in the loss of lives that would otherwise have been saved thanks to advances made possible by the funded research. [I learned about this story from the awesome team at Radiolab Podcasts WNYC Studios and their podcast about it: https://lnkd.in/g-XJXH_B]

Is federally funded university research a waste of taxpayer money? Let’s talk return on investment. Over the last 17 years, my lab has received ~$15M in federal research support. Here's what taxpayers got in return: ✅ 44 PhD students, 8 MS students, and nearly 80 undergraduates trained in cutting-edge bioengineering—now leaders in biotech, academia, and public service. ✅ 80+ issued U.S. patents and 200+ peer-reviewed papers, sharing knowledge that improves health and spurs innovation. ✅ 5+ startups launched, raising $150M+ in private investment and creating 150+ high-skilled jobs. ✅ 5+ products commercialized, including IntelliSep, a sepsis test saving lives and reducing hospital costs (~30% mortality reduction, ~$1400 saved per patient). First used in hospitals in Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas. That’s just one lab. And that’s just what we can track. The full ripple effect of training, ideas, tools, and technologies created in university labs is far greater. Now, consider this: One F-35 fighter jet engine costs about $14M–$16M—just the engine. A single border wall segment (1 mile) under some contracts has cost $15–$30M For the cost of one jet engine or a half-mile of wall, federal research funding can launch companies, train leaders, save lives, and return 10x in private investment and impact. What’s more capital efficient? What has a longer-lasting impact on society? Federal research funding isn’t charity. It’s one of the smartest, most leveraged investments the U.S. makes. 🔊 If you run a research lab, I encourage you to post your own return on investment from federal research support. Show the public and policymakers just how much value we’re creating—and why this investment in America’s scientific engine is among the most capital-efficient bets our country can make to power it's future. #ScienceFunding #AcademicROI #InnovationEconomy #ResearchImpact #FederalFunding #PublicInvestment #STEM

For decades, the US government has painstakingly kept American science #1 globally—and every facet of American life has improved because of it. The internet? Flu shot? Ozempic? All grew out of federally-funded research. Now all that's being dismantled. For MIT Technology Review I spoke with more than 10+ federal workers who occupy, or until recently occupied, scientific and technical positions across various agencies. They explained to me how much behind-the-scenes work the US government does to keep America’s engine of innovation humming. Government funds account for more than *half* the R&D budget that US universities spend each year—in 2023, that was $60B out of $109B. The gov also does a lot of its own research at national labs like Oak Ridge & Los Alamos and agencies like NOAA and DoD. What are the returns on that investment? Better healthcare, better drugs, better consumer tech. Per Mariana Mazzucato's research: Pretty much every major technological transformation in the US, from electric cars to Google to the iPhone, can trace its roots back to basic science research once funded by the federal government. But it’s not just about the money. The government helps attract the best minds to the US. It helps the best minds in the US go safely overseas to do field work. It brokers agreements to foster international science collaboration. It tracks and aggregates data to support life-saving research. US scientific leadership also plays a huge role in bolstering US *global* leadership. Being world-class at science has long been a hugely successful diplomatic and soft power tool for deepening relationships with allies and stabilizing those with competitors. Plus, if the US wants to secure its semiconductor supply chain, if it wants to prepare the military for climate change, if it wants to prevent the next pandemic, it needs top scientists. Now the Trump admin is hacking away at every pillar of American scientific leadership: Stable science funding. Academic freedom. Many of the federal agencies and programs that support science and technology work. And all while countries like China are becoming their own scientific leaders. Federal workers are stunned. Keeping the US first in science and technology has never been a partisan issue. No one predicted the wholesale assault on these foundations of American prosperity. https://lnkd.in/gx3EBRxF

Our global study on the state of trust in scientists in 68 countries is now out in Nature Human Behaviour! 🥳 Given narratives of a crisis of #trust in scientists, Niels G. Mede and I launched and led the Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) Many Labs study to investigate trust in scientists around the world. With a consortium of 241 researchers at 179 institutions, we surveyed 71,922 individuals in 68 countries, providing the largest dataset on trust in scientists post-pandemic: https://lnkd.in/d9WsA5AN Here are some key findings: 💡 Across 68 countries, trust in scientists is moderately high (mean trust = 3.62, on a scale from 1 = very low trust to 5 = very high trust), with strong differences across countries. Our study confirms and strengthens previous work that refutes the narrative of wide-ranging low trust in scientists. 👐 Majorities perceive scientists to be qualified (78%), honest (57%), and concerned about people’s well-being (56%). 🗣️ 83% of respondents believe that scientists should communicate about science with the general public. 📣 49% believe that that scientists should actively advocate for specific policies (23% disagree). 52% believe that scientists should be more involved in the policymaking process (22% disagree). ➡️ Check out the TISP app for country-specific results: https://lnkd.in/dVbYyYhD ➡️ For more information on the TISP Project: https://lnkd.in/dUtZBCfY ____ On a more personal note: Leading the TISP-Consortium has been an incredibly rewarding experience. I’m deeply grateful to everyone who contributed to making the TISP project a success—it was a truly collaborative effort. A special thanks goes to the study co-lead Niels G. Mede, whose dedication and kindness made all the difference.  I also want to express my heartfelt gratitude to the TISP Core Team—our advisory board of nine experts—who played a pivotal role in shaping the project's success, providing guidance on all sorts of matters, and always having an open ear: Sebastian Berger John C. Besley Cameron Brick Marina Joubert Ed Maibach Sabina Mihelj Oreskes Naomi Mike S. Schäfer Sander van der Linden The biggest thanks go out to the many co-authors for their trust (🥁 pun intended), patience, and support. This would not have been possible without all of you. Special thanks go to Oreskes Naomi for hosting me at Harvard University for two years (funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation SNSF). Leading such a big project on short-term postdoc contracts was professionally and personally challenging at times, and I am grateful to the SOCRATES CAS at University of Hanover, Mike S. Schäfer and his team at UZH Department of Communication and Media Research (IKMZ), David N. Bresch and the Weather and Climate Risks Group at ETH Zürich, and the Collegium Helveticum and its fellows, for their support in the final year of the project. 🙏

I was surprised by that: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, trust in science has steadily declined. The fraction of US adults that have little to no confidence in scientists to act in the public’s interests has roughly doubled, from 12% in April 20 to 27% in October 2023. These findings of the Pew Research Center have recently been confirmed in Germany, where much of Bayer’s research activity originates. The Science Barometer 2023 by the German "Science in Dialogue" initiative shows that the fraction of Germans who somewhat or completely distrust science has likewise roughly doubled from 6% in April 2020 to 13% in August 2023. Despite the stark difference in absolute levels, the dynamics are remarkably similar. I firmly believe that sound scientific knowledge is crucial for tackling future global challenges. We must therefore monitor and counteract these developments.  For science to be trusted, it must improve people's lives. Public investment in research is more important than ever. Equally important is prudent regulation that does not hinder companies’ R&D departments from delivering persuasive products, e.g., by cutting unnecessary red tape. According to the German Science Barometer, the main reason behind the distrust however is related to the financing of research. And indeed, the history of industry efforts to manipulate scientific findings is well documented. Bayer is committed to continuously addressing this issue. That is why we are expanding the Bayer Science Collaboration Explorer to the U.S., after last year’s launch in Germany. The database invites everyone to discover our research collaborations with public research institutions and individuals. Both studies also emphasize the fundamental role of education. Improving the quality of our educational institutions is essential to ensure trust in science in the long term. With our educational portfolio, we want to contribute to this safeguard. Bayer's school laboratory program Baylab is a good example of this. The 5th of May 2023 marked the end of the three years and ninety-six days in which the COVID-19 pandemic was formally declared as a ‘public health emergency of international concern’ by the WHO. But the damage to trust has stayed. It is now time to rebuild trust through clear communication – and to admit mistakes that were made when reliable knowledge was still scarce. I would like to invite everyone to think about ways in which we can get back to a basis of mutually accepted facts. Let's make use of the naturally persuasive power of the scientific method. Explore more findings from the Pew Research Center’s survey (https://lnkd.in/ebCtuXqD) and the German Science Barometer 2023 (https://lnkd.in/e-nYtawr; currently in German only).

Explore the latest in sustainability 🌎 This edition of the newsletter highlights critical environmental and social challenges while showcasing innovative approaches driving sustainable progress. Topics cover pressing issues like plastic pollution, carbon capture advancements, and strategies for integrating sustainability into core business operations, providing actionable insights for addressing global challenges. The focus extends to the importance of cross-industry collaboration in accelerating impactful solutions. Examples from transportation, architecture, and sports illustrate how shared efforts can reduce emissions and improve resource efficiency, reinforcing the role of partnerships in advancing sustainability goals. The newsletter also examines the growing pressure on industries to act, driven by rising public awareness and regulatory demands. Key insights include the risks of inaction, such as environmental degradation and rising health concerns, emphasizing the need for immediate and measurable responses. Highlighted are strategies for leveraging data and technology to enhance transparency, reduce waste, and achieve emissions reductions. These efforts demonstrate the potential for scalable innovation and practical solutions across diverse sectors. Lastly, the edition offers a forward-looking perspective on transforming societal attitudes and industry practices. By addressing systemic challenges and fostering collaboration, these insights provide a foundation for sustainable growth and meaningful environmental action. #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #climateaction

Missions-led science - accelerating impact for New Zealand’s bioeconomy Our biggest challenges - economic growth, biosecurity, climate resilience, and biodiversity loss - are complex and far broader than any one scientific discipline. They are systems-level challenges, and solving them requires new ways of thinking and working together. The Bioeconomy Science Institute is aligning ourselves around the big opportunities where we can make the most impact. That’s why we are adopting a Missions-Led Science Framework - a way to focus our science, organise our expertise, and collaborate with industry, government, and Māori partners to solve the challenges that matter most for New Zealand and beyond The bioeconomy is moving fast globally, and so are the pressures and opportunities shaping it. Estimates put the global bioeconomy at US$4–5 trillion today, with projections indicating it could exceed US$8 trillion by 2030. At the same time, New Zealand’s bioeconomy is already fundamental to our prosperity and regional wellbeing - spanning food, fibre, biomaterials, manufacturing, biotech and environmental sectors - and is central to how we create value from our renewable resources while protecting ecosystems. The Bioeconomy Science Institute provides national scale and depth to accelerate bioeconomy innovation, resilience, and environmental outcomes. Being mission-led is how we turn that scale into faster, clearer, measurable impact. Missions-led approaches are being used around the world because they help tackle complex problems. This matters because the challenges we face are interdependent and require new forms of collaboration - focused, partner-connected, and outcome-driven. Our six Mission Impact Areas: ✅Bio-Based Exports - Grow the value of bio-based exports from and for Aotearoa New Zealand ✅Climate Resilient Bioeconomy - Enhance the resilience, adaptability and value of our natural and productive environments as our climate changes ✅Biosecurity and Bioprotection - Safeguard Aotearoa New Zealand from pest and disease impacts in our natural and built environments ✅Transformational Technologies - Create and utilise new technologies to enhance economic, environmental and societal outcomes ✅Thriving Ecosystems and Biodiscovery - Protect our unique whenua, flora and fauna while advancing biodiscovery and supporting Māori growth aspirations ✅Bio-Based Industries - Deliver increased value from new and novel biological products and processes The future bioeconomy won’t be built by any single organisation - it will be built through aligned effort across the system, with shared goals and shared delivery. A missions-led approach helps us do that with focus, accountability, and collective momentum. #Bioeconomy #Science #Innovation #Climate #Biosecurity #Biodiversity #Biotechnology #NewZealand #Sustainable https://lnkd.in/dWfGK5X7