Academia is clinging on for dear life amid the recent cuts to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) grants program. Honestly, it feels like we are headed towards a revitalization of the Stone Age, a period known for its lack of scientific progress. We’ve been through science-centered budget cuts before—think post-Apollo-Era NASA budget cuts. But this time, the current freeze on basic scientific research isn’t just a blip; it’s setting us up for a long-term disaster, and guess who’s likely to be stuck with the short end of the stick?
Women.
Women in STEM
As an economics student, and even last summer in the American Economics Association Summer program, I was constantly surrounded by women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) fields. We would even chant “Women in STEM! Women in STEM,” whenever we did simple math like calculating our tip after getting a meal together. This experience has increased my interest in how many women in science fields may be affected by NSF’s funding cuts.
It surprised me that only 3% of women are in computer, engineering, or science fields, including but not limited to programming, web development, research analytics, mathematics, architecture, food science, environmental scientists, chemists, physicists, and social scientists (see Table 1). Notably, the share of Indigenous American women in science occupations (6%) was the second highest.
Table 1. Count and Percent of Women in Science Occupations by Race and Ethnicity: 18 to 65 Years of Age.
Disaggregated data reveal an intriguing trend: a larger share of Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous women work in the sciences than their male counterparts (See Table 2). The potential loss of this diversity due to cuts in federal research funding is not just a shame; it’s a disaster for advancing knowledge and the richness of scientific inquiry. Our unique experiences shape our questions, and we need those diverse perspectives to address today’s public policy challenges. Federal support of scientific research is not just a nice idea; it is essential to propel the future of science forward.
Table 2. Percent of Women and Men in Science Occupations: 18 to 65 Years of Age
Investments for Progress
Women bring a broad and invaluable perspective to the science community, and their participation is critical in creating solutions to the variety of complex issues we see in the 21st century. My former coworker, Rejane Frederick, often talked about the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats except those with holes in them. Even before NSF funding cuts, the data show that in 2023, women’s average grant award was about $342,000, while men’s average was $659,000. Equitable funding from NSF is an investment in scientific research that lifts all boats.
There was an interesting quote from Harvard University’s President Alan Garber to the Secretary of Education in response to her letter informing him that the institution would no longer be eligible for federal grants.
And you and I have a shared interest in ensuring that American universities continue to be global leaders in innovative and life-saving research that benefits all Americans, boosts the national economy, and serves the country’s interests.
That starts with valuing contributions from all scientists and ensuring all women can see careers in the sciences as an opportunity rather than a challenge. It’s one thing to encourage women to work in STEM fields, but it’s another to provide them with the resources they need to thrive. I worry that tangible support for pursuing a career in science for my generation, and for those who come after us, may lead many to seek opportunities in other fields.
To help women thrive in STEM occupations, we recommend scaling science skill-building classes during their early education, creating programs that allow young girls to build skills that allow them to be competitive, and providing childcare at each stage of their scientific career path – college and the workplace. I know these are not new recommendations, but they are worth repeating until their implementation is commonplace.
Although we did not decide which funding opportunities were cut, progressing beyond today’s limitations begins with changing the narrative about who belongs in scientific spaces.
And that is within our control.
