Academic Funding

Political Science Serving the Public Interest Academic Funding

Image courtesy of vitasamb2001

Political Science Serving the Public Interest

June 12, 2012 2040

Image courtesy of vitasamb2001

On May 9, the House of Representatives adopted a provision that would preclude the National Science Foundation (NSF) from supporting research in the field of political science. We believe the important public benefits of this research and the critical role played by the NSF’s annual contribution of about $11m per year to political science research.

The mission of the NSF is “to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense”—the same concerns that guide members of Congress.

Since its creation in 1965, the NSF’s political science program has made substantial contributions to all of these key concerns. In recent years, the NSF has funded research on some of our leading security issues:  What are the factors that lead to international conflict? What are the causes of terrorism?  What are the causes of civil war and state failure? Is nuclear proliferation stoppable? Do economic sanctions work?

The NSF has also supported political science research directly related to national prosperity.  What are the political factors that lead to excessive spending by state or national governments, or to economic growth, high levels of unemployment or high levels of inflation?  How do political factors contribute to trade wars, migration or citizen unrest and violence?  What are the characteristics of governments that make them more or less attractive for direct investment by firms?  What can be done to make the government more accountable and efficient?

NSF-funded political science research has also enhanced national welfare by enriching our understanding of American civic life and democracy.  Who votes and why?  How can the government better engage and respond to citizens?  How can the mechanics of our democracy be improved to better represent citizens’ wishes and desires?

In the floor debate on the defunding amendment, the political science program was criticized because a large proportion of its grants go to a small number of universities, but in fact current recipients of NSF political science funding are from 81 different institutions.   Just as importantly, the users of the findings work in hundreds of institutions—at colleges and universities, but also in government agencies, think tanks, news organizations, and citizens’ groups.  One example is the American National Election Study which has provided data on American elections to thousands of researchers, journalists and policymakers.

Another common objection to political science research is that similar research is conducted by journalists, consultants and policy analysts without public support.  This other work is important, but much of it depends on political science research to apply the principles of scientific inquiry to the subject of politics to produce the data and scientific analysis that become the raw material that others then interpret.

Journalists may ask who is going to win the next election, but a political scientist asks about the factors that drive voter choice and electoral outcomes.  A policy analyst may ask how quickly U.S. troops can be drawn down in Afghanistan, but a political scientist wants to know what factors contribute most to successful counterinsurgency strategies.  The answers to the specific questions of the journalist and analyst are ultimately based on the more comprehensive perspective that the political scientist brings.

We believe that every dollar of federal funding should be seriously scrutinized. The NSF political science program has been committed to the same standards of rigorous, evidence-based scholarship as have the rest of the foundation’s programs.  The work it has supported has made major contributions to our understanding of America’s democracy and its place in the world. The research has promoted understanding on vital issues important to Congress, including national security, economic prosperity, and the health of American civic life. We deeply appreciate the generous support provided by Congress for NSF-funded political science research in previous budgets, and we strongly encourage that support to continue.

Signed,

John Coleman, Chair, Department of Political Science, University of Wisconsin

Timothy Colton, Chair, Department of Government, Harvard University

Evelyne Huber, Chair, Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina

John Huber, Chair, Department of Political Science, Columbia University

Taeku Lee, Chair, Travers Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley

Jeffrey Lewis, Chair, Department of Political Science, University of California, Los Angeles

Nolan McCarty, Chair, Department of Politics, Princeton University

Josiah Ober, Chair, Department of Political Science, Stanford University

Karen Remmer, Chair, Department of Political Science, Duke University

Charles Shipan, Chair, Department of Political Science, University of Michigan

Susan Stokes, Chair, Department of Political Science, Yale University

Please find the original article, and comments to it, at the wonderful Political Science Blog, The Monkey Cage

Related Articles

Popular Paper Examines Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative Analysis
Impact
July 10, 2025

Popular Paper Examines Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative Analysis

Read Now
Why Men Have a Bigger Carbon Footprint Than Women  
Insights
July 8, 2025

Why Men Have a Bigger Carbon Footprint Than Women  

Read Now
Examining How Open Research Affects Vulnerable Participants
Impact
July 8, 2025

Examining How Open Research Affects Vulnerable Participants

Read Now
Anna Harvey Stepping Down as SSRC President
Infrastructure
June 18, 2025

Anna Harvey Stepping Down as SSRC President

Read Now
Closing the Gender Pay Gap: Why Intermediaries Matter

Closing the Gender Pay Gap: Why Intermediaries Matter

Despite decades of reform, gender pay gaps (GPGs) remain a stubborn and unjust feature of labour markets globally. On average, women are […]

Read Now
Degrading Sites of Punishment and Pain: The Case for Abolishing Prisons

Degrading Sites of Punishment and Pain: The Case for Abolishing Prisons

Prisons have been in crisis in England and Wales for 200 years. The state has responded with piecemeal, ‘pragmatic’ reforms which have […]

Read Now
Who Gets to Flourish? 

Who Gets to Flourish? 

In this month’s issue of The Evidence newsletter, Josephine Lethbridge examines how gender shapes experiences of human flourishing.  A recently published international […]

Read Now
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments