Foreign countries are courting American researchers as the Trump administration cancels federal grants en masse that don’t comport to its policy agenda, higher education experts say.
The administration had slashed between $3.3 and $3.7 billion in research funding to over 600 universities by late July, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. And institutions abroad — particularly in Europe, China and Canada — have taken notice, stepping up their recruitment of U.S. researchers, said Tabbye Chavous, executive director of the American Educational Research Association, in an email.
The global competition for talent was already intensifying before President Donald Trump retook the White House last year, but the funding cuts since have "strengthened our competitors,” said Chavous.
A loss of scientific research talent in the U.S. could affect the country’s economic growth, said Michael Lubell, a physics professor at the City College of New York. It could also hurt the U.S.’s ability to address climate change, causing America to fall behind other countries like China that are ramping up research to reduce carbon emissions, Lubell said.
“We are deeply concerned that if more U.S. researchers move abroad, the country could lose its innovative edge,” said Chavous.
It’s too early to know how many researchers are leaving the country due to recent funding cuts, as the administration has not been in office for long, said Lubell. But by March, about three-quarters of more than 1,600 scientists surveyed said they were considering leaving the U.S. due to the disruptions, according to a poll conducted by the science journal Nature.
“We have a lot of very talented people here, and if they cannot pursue their careers here, they are open to going elsewhere,” Lubell said.
Plus, even if researchers don’t move away, the administration’s policies could push young people away from the sciences altogether, said Lubell.
“If you’re a young person, is this really something you want to do, if you’re basically being told that you’re not valued?” Lubell said.
Countries ramp up recruitment
Beyond choking off research funding from institutions within its crosshairs, Trump also issued an Aug. 7 executive order giving political appointees the power to sign off on federal grants and deny proposals that are not in line with the White House’s policy priorities. The directive undercuts America’s long-standing practice of funding projects based on scientific merit, experts say.
A slew of countries have tried to capitalize on the sudden disinvestment and policy changes, launching programs and allocating funding aimed at recruiting researchers from the U.S. and other countries.
The U.K., for instance, put 54 million pounds behind a new initiative in June that aims to draw and support international researchers and research teams. The European Union created a campaign backed by 500 million euros in May to attract foreign researchers. France, Germany and the Netherlands have each launched their own recruitment initiatives, as did the Australian Academy of Sciences through a program that debuted in April.
“Australia has an urgent and unparalleled opportunity to attract the smartest minds leaving the United States to seed capability here and nurture the next generation of scientists and innovators,” the AAS said in the program’s announcement.
“We are deeply concerned that if more U.S. researchers move abroad, the country could lose its innovative edge.”
Tabbye Chavous
Executive director, American Educational Research Association
Chinese government leaders are also reportedly continuing their efforts to lure international researchers and graduate students, including from the U.S., to the country. And a Canadian initiative, launched by Toronto's University Health Network in April, has already attracted scientists working in the U.S. — with some having made the move up north and upwards of 600 others expressing interest, according to CTV News. That includes a Canadian-born scientist who was doing cancer research at Penn Medical in Philadelphia.
International institutions have always been interested in U.S. research candidates, but recruiting them has become easier due to those countries' new initiatives and funding opportunities, as well as to the Trump administration’s approach to higher ed funding, said Zachary Smith, executive partner and market leader for global education at WittKieffer, a search firm that helps universities recruit academic research leaders.
“They are making it much easier for researchers in the U.S. to move internationally, to get work visas and also to get funding,” said Smith. “They’re definitely seeing more U.S. candidates apply for some of their roles.”
Amid the Trump administration’s restrictions on visas, many are also recruiting their own citizens who are currently working as researchers in the U.S., said Smith. The administration recently imposed a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas, which colleges use to hire foreign researchers.
But if funding policies stabilize a bit in the U.S., researchers may not have a reason to uproot their lives to move to another country, said Smith.
“I don’t think you’ll see a mass exodus, but I do think you’ll see a lot of people looking very closely at the opportunities abroad,” said Smith. “And that’s already happening.”
A sense of uncertainty
The U.S. started recruiting international students to research laboratories in the late 1980s and early ‘90s to fill the void left by young physicists and mathematicians who opted to work on Wall Street or in the private sector, said Lubell.
“People from all over the world really flocked here because the federal government supported research reasonably well, and because universities welcomed them,” said Lubell.
But the Trump administration’s policies have contributed to a sense of uncertainty among higher ed researchers that’s led them to look for opportunities abroad, said Smith.
In fact, more than one-third of employees in research-related higher ed roles who are considering leaving their jobs listed job security as a chief reason, according to a survey released in September by CUPA-HR. That’s 10 percentage points higher than in any other department in higher ed.
“Given the ongoing instability in research funding and shifting institutional priorities, it is not surprising that job security is a heightened concern for these employees,” the CUPA-HR report stated.
Lubell is among the researchers that institutions abroad tried — in his case unsuccessfully — to recruit. He received an email from a Chinese university a few months ago asking if he would be interested in helping them set up a research institute. Now a professor, Lubell said he turned the position down because he’s moved past his decades-long career as a researcher.
But if a top American researcher is uncertain whether their work will continue to be funded in the U.S., and another country, such as the U.K., offers them money and resources to do that work at a prestige institution such as the University of Cambridge or the University of Oxford, they’ll give it a close look, said Smith.
“Why wouldn’t you look at that if you are a top researcher in the U.S. right now?” said Smith.
Diana Andriola, a life sciences and biotech career coach, works with scientists leaving federal government jobs, as well as those in academia who have been approached by international recruiters — mostly from Europe, she said.
Many life pressures, such as quality of life and opportunities for their children, are pushing researchers to consider options in the U.S., instead of abroad, and many are actively eying jobs in the American private sector for companies in the biotech or health sectors, said Andriola.
But the job market for researchers has been challenging, and when funding is threatened, that’s really pushing people to make some considerations they haven't had to before, she said.
What can colleges do?
Colleges and universities in the U.S. have an opportunity to recruit top talent who are leaving other institutions or the federal government, said Andriola.
Expediting the hiring process can help institutions recruit those researchers, as many need jobs quickly. They should also actively reach out to job-seeking scientists to inform them of any available opportunities, she said.
Universities also need to be transparent about their plans, as uncertainty is preventing researchers from making decisions and commitments, said Andriola.
Do they plan to cut funding in certain areas? Are they going to find other sources to keep certain research programs going? Are they going to resist federal pressure on how they run their institution?
Higher ed institutions can also help retain their researchers amid the uncertain federal funding landscape by soliciting contributions from wealthy alumni, philanthropists and industries to support their work, said Lubell.
But even with that, waiting for the scientific landscape in the U.S. to change could waste valuable years of a scientific researcher’s career, said Lubell.
“My advice is, if you get an offer someplace else, take it,” he said.
