Opinion: Trump’s war on science imperils global development and cooperation

U.S. President Donald Trump’s systematic dismantling of America’s scientific infrastructure isn't just a domestic crisis — it represents an existential threat to international development efforts and global governance structures that depend on reliable scientific data. Since resuming office in January, the Trump administration has taken aggressive steps to minimize the role of science in the federal government. The dismantlement of scientific agencies, funding cuts for scientific research, and mass layoffs of scientists raise the risk of public health crises, threaten to increase environmental degradation, and may slow the pace of technological progress. These efforts are not unique to Trump, nor are the repercussions limited to the United States. In new research, we show that targeting of scientific expertise has long been a part of populist governments’ playbooks and demonstrate the knock-on effects for the functioning of international organizations — particularly those active in the global development space. How Trump has attacked science The White House’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, under the leadership of Elon Musk, has dismissed or placed on administrative leave thousands of workers spanning dozens of government agencies involved in scientific research. The weakened agencies include the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, National Science Foundation, or NSF, Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA. The cuts have notably affected probationary workers and federal contractors performing the day-to-day scientific work crucial to the government’s efforts to combat climate change and contain disease outbreaks (such as the bird flu rapidly spreading throughout the U.S.). Senior leaders of scientific agencies, including the former acting director of the NIH, Lawrence Tabak, have also been dismissed, forced to retire, or chosen to resign when faced with demands from DOGE or others in the Trump administration. Domestically, Trump’s efforts to root out alleged corruption and government excess could decimate the enterprise of scientific research — a long-standing area of American strength and comparative advantage. Medical research at leading universities and medical schools has been frozen as a result of cuts to the NIH and NSF budgets, and lifesaving medicine has expired in ports because of the dissolution of the U.S. Agency for International Development. The ability of government groups to promptly and effectively respond to climate disasters has also been weakened as EPA and NOAA have come under fire. This has occurred all while China, the leading geopolitical challenger to the U.S., expands its funding of similar scientific enterprises. The detrimental consequences for global development Our research demonstrates that populist governments systematically degrade the quality of scientific information provided to international organizations. Trump’s targeting of scientific research is emblematic of the deep skepticism populist leaders often hold toward technocratic expertise. Populist leaders around the world cast themselves as defenders of a country’s “pure people” against a distant, morally and financially corrupt elite, including academic experts. Trump and his allies have notably couched their curtailment of NIH funding as part of a broader effort to root out a “woke [diversity, equity, and inclusion]” culture at universities — something framed to be at odds with the interests and values of “normal” Americans. For Trump and others, this manifests in a gutting of government agencies staffed by such experts, which often work in the areas of the environment and public health. In other cases, populists can lean on bureaucrats to manipulate or skew the data they produce. Regardless of the exact tack taken, both strategies hinder the operations of international organizations reliant on scientific data produced by member state governments. Our research, based on novel data tracking the quality of information provided to international organizations, finds that populist governments are significantly less likely to submit high-quality scientific data to institutions like the World Bank. Compared to other governments, populists are notably less likely to supply international organizations with information on public health outcomes, such as disease incidence, and environmental conditions, such as pollution levels. When populists do supply information to international organizations — as they are mandated to do under agreements like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change — the data is often much less accurate, a consequence of populists’ erosion of government scientific capacity. This is not just an inconvenience — it directly impairs the ability of the primary organs of global development to coordinate responses to pressing challenges. Consider the issue of climate change. The Paris Agreement and UNFCCC rely on self-reported emissions data from countries to track progress toward global climate goals, name and shame laggards, and encourage governments to ratchet up their levels of climate ambition. If states like the U.S. underreport their emissions or refuse to submit data altogether, these informational mechanisms that underlie contemporary international climate cooperation may break down. Our research finds that the greenhouse gas emissions data reported by populists tends to be less accurate than those reported by other governments. The stakes for global governance The struggle for reliable scientific information represents the front line in the battle for functional international cooperation. The consequences of Trump’s attacks on scientific research and information collection will extend far beyond the U.S. In an increasingly interconnected world, decisions made in one state can ripple across the globe. When governments undermine scientific data collection, they don’t just weaken their own governance; they endanger international efforts to manage transnational challenges. For their part, international organizations must quickly adapt in an effort to fill crucial informational gaps and continue their lifesaving work — even if such adaptations cannot fully compensate for the void left by the U.S. To do so, international organizations can lean on other member states. The European Union, for example, collects global data on emissions that it shares with institutions like the World Bank and that can be used to verify state-reported data. They can also bolster their in-house capacity to collect and analyze crucial information. Remote sensing technologies were used during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency of Brazil, for example, to track deforestation in the Amazon. The fight for reliable information is, at its core, a fight for functional international cooperation. And in an era of mounting global crises, that fight has never been more urgent.