Seven months after the sequester took effect, a new study released Monday revealed the impact sustained cuts to research have had on the economy as well as major research universities such as Boston University.
Social science professor Tom Whalen said the sequester, which took effect in March, has had a negative effect on the country’s recovery from the 2008 economic crisis. Research universities such as Boston University are vital for advancing the economy, and such spending cuts will continue to have a drag effect into the forseeable future, he said.
“They [research universities] are the engines for technological innovation and job creation in this country, and a part of that is if you cut the funding for that … it is basically shooting yourself in the foot … in terms of getting us out of the economic morass,” Whalen said.
The study, conducted by the Association of American Universities, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities and The Science Coalition, represents 171 research universities, including BU.
Fifty percent of respondents said they faced faculty reductions at their institutions, while 24 percent said they have laid off faculty members. 81 percent said they sustained direct impacts to their research activity, with 19 percent cancelling and 38 percent delaying field or experiment work.
Additionally, 42 percent of respondents said the spending cuts have directly impacted their students. 23 percent said they admitted fewer graduate students, while 30 percent said they faced a reduction in research opportunities for undergraduate students.
Whalen said universities have responded to cuts in research and development by laying off positions on their faculties. Creating jobs is essential to lifting the country out of its economic crisis, and the sequestration has hindered this effort.
“The name of the game here is job creation, and if sequestration cuts continue on, it’s really going to prevent a full recovery, and that can’t be good news for anyone, Democrat or Republican,” Whalen said.
Jennifer Grodsky, vice president for BU Federal Relations, said some schools and units within BUSM have reported that they are laying off certain positions and hiring fewer people. Additionally, BUSM officials have sustained major cuts and delays to several vital research grants.
“One example … is the Framingham Heart Study which is funded by the National Institutes of Health and [administered] by BU,” Grodksy said. “That’s [the sequester] definitely delayed some of the work that they are doing, which is really amazing work. A lot of the things that we know about heart health and cardiovascular disease actually come from [FHS], so having a spending cut there is really challenging for our researchers.”
Grodsky said BU’s Federal Relations Office, which facilitates BU’s involvement in key federal decisions affecting research universities, has been working closely with their members of Congress in Washington to control the effects of the sequester on BU.
“We’re really fortunate that they been very vocal in that they would like to see funding for research not be impacted by the sequester, so we talk with them and give them examples of the impact at BU,” Grodsky said. “And [BU] President [Robert] Brown has met with several of our legislators in Washington to talk to them, and everyone has been very sympathetic, and I know that they are working to fix this.”
David Coleman, chairman of the Department of Medicine, said his department is the largest on BU’s Medical Campus and has seen a significant drop in research funding in the last year.
“The departments that are affected the most are the ones that are most dependent on research funding, and that’s our department,” Coleman said. “We have over 100 Ph.D.s in our department, and about 250 people who are supported by research grants … and that’s just faculty. Imagine a 10 percent reduction on that funding — that’s a lot of people.”
Coleman said these spending cuts have created a lot of financial uncertainty across BU’s research departments, and have threatened the pipeline of new people who hope to enter the research field.
“People thinking about research careers are wondering what are the opportunities that are going to be open for me when they graduate,” Coleman said. “… One of the most insidious and negative legacies of the sequestration is that it discourages the very people that we need to be encouraging who are trying to pursue research careers.”
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
