"USDA’s Controversial Directive: Scrutinizing Foreign Scientists or Stifling Innovation?"
USDA Implements Controversial Directive Targeting Foreign Collaborators in Research
In a significant policy shift, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has directed its employees to scrutinize foreign scientists collaborating on research projects, raising concerns about the implications for scientific integrity and international cooperation. This directive, part of a broader initiative to enhance national security, mandates that USDA researchers investigate foreign co-authors for any potential “subversive or criminal activity.”
Background of the Directive
The USDA’s new policy follows a memorandum signed by former President Donald Trump aimed at safeguarding U.S.-funded research from foreign interference. The directive instructs employees within the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to utilize online searches to vet the backgrounds of foreign nationals involved in scientific publications. Names of flagged individuals are then forwarded to national security experts within the agency.
Internal Reactions and Concerns
At a recent meeting, USDA supervisors expressed alarm over the directive, with one employee labeling it “dystopic.” Concerns were raised about the potential chilling effect on scientific collaboration, particularly for students and postdoctoral researchers who often hold temporary visas. Employees voiced discomfort, fearing that the new requirements could expose foreign scientists to undue scrutiny and jeopardize their careers.
Jennifer Jones, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, criticized the directive as reminiscent of McCarthy-era tactics. She argued that it could deter collaboration with top-tier researchers globally, undermining the scientific community’s integrity.
Scope of the Policy
The USDA’s directive specifically targets collaborations with scientists from “countries of concern,” which include China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. However, the scrutiny extends beyond these nations, encompassing researchers from countries like Canada and Germany. USDA employees are now required to compile lists of foreign co-authors, which are submitted to the agency’s Office of Homeland Security for further evaluation.
Historical Context and Precedents
The U.S. government has long been wary of foreign involvement in agricultural research, citing instances of espionage. Notably, in 2016, Chinese scientist Mo Hailong was sentenced to prison for attempting to steal patented corn seeds. Similarly, in 2022, Xiang Haitao pleaded guilty to stealing trade secrets from Monsanto. These cases have fueled ongoing national security concerns regarding foreign ownership of agricultural land and the potential for espionage in research settings.
Implications for Scientific Collaboration
International collaboration has been vital for the USDA’s research efforts, addressing challenges such as disease mitigation and crop testing in diverse environments. The USDA’s own website emphasizes the importance of global partnerships in finding solutions to agricultural issues. However, the new directive threatens to disrupt these collaborations, as researchers may hesitate to engage with foreign scientists due to the heightened scrutiny.
Caroline Wagner, an emeritus professor at Ohio State University, highlighted that the increased vetting could stifle innovation and reduce the flow of knowledge that has historically driven scientific progress. The directive may particularly impact elite researchers who often engage in international collaborations.
Future Outlook
The USDA’s policy was internally communicated in November 2022, following a July memo from Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins that underscored the national security risks associated with foreign collaborations. The memo called for immediate action to halt research with foreign scientists and emphasized the responsibility of USDA employees to prioritize American interests.
As the USDA continues to implement these changes, the agency has not clarified the fate of flagged foreign researchers beyond potential publication rejections. Employees have reported ongoing vetting processes, but formal guidance remains pending.
Conclusion
The USDA’s directive represents a significant escalation in the scrutiny of foreign researchers, raising critical questions about the future of scientific collaboration in the U.S. As the agency navigates national security concerns, the potential consequences for innovation and international partnerships loom large, prompting calls for a reevaluation of policies that could hinder scientific progress.