Public funding for science relies on a social contract: in return for support, science demonstrates its value to society. Until now, the scientific community has enjoyed a great deal of autonomy in deciding where to focus its research. But some governments are intruding on that self-regulation and narrowing how science budgets are spent — away from contested areas such as social sciences and climate change, for example.
Although governments, as patrons of science, are entitled to set broad priorities and expectations, there is a risk to societal progress if policy-driven management of science becomes excessive or intrusive. To keep the balance, the scientific community needs to keep emphasizing the societal benefits of science. Scientists must build compelling narratives and allies across business and civil society.
Scientists should recognize their own political biases to build public trust
Helping researchers to do this is a priority of the International Science Council (ISC) — a non-governmental organization that unites more than 250 international scientific unions, academies and research councils. In the past five years, under my presidency, the ISC has reoriented to focus on helping scientists to serve society better.
We’re supporting training to improve communication with policymakers, for example, and looking at the broader dimensions of ethics and responsibilities in science. We’re examining the challenges of artificial intelligence, transdisciplinary research, data governance and sharing.
Public trust in science is being tested in a fast-changing world. Overall, science remains highly trusted and scientists are seen, for the most part, as members of a trusted profession. But in countries with polarized politics, extreme voices shout loudest and can weaponize disinformation. Surveys suggest a link between political identity and attitudes to science, including total distrust on the part of extreme populists and rejection of science when it comes to areas, such as vaccines, in which the evidence conflicts with someone’s values, interests or political stance.
Six ways to put the public at the heart of science and policy
Researchers must navigate these tensions without allowing science itself to become politicized. Yet, too often, they can come across as entitled and self-serving, more interested in securing funding than in explaining what their science can do for society. Uncertainties are often swept aside, and hyperbolic claims lead to public cynicism. Acknowledging what scientists don’t know, and that many people also turn to other systems of thought — including religion and Indigenous knowledge — helps to engender trust.
AI-based technologies are also creating opportunities and risks for science’s trustworthiness. Generative AI has led to an overwhelming flood of grant applications and an increase in papers of questionable quality. There are growing concerns about what AI use means for the integrity of the scientific record, undermining trust in science itself.
Stronger sanctions are needed against paper mills, tokenistic or non-existent peer review and fraudulent content. The ISC and academic publishers have initiated a project to identify how trust markers might be developed to label journals that have trustworthy practices.
