Margaret Williams while accompanying a team of U.S. polar bear researchers on the Beaufort Sea during her tenure at World Wildlife Fund. Source: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Arctic research has not been spared as President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk seek to slash what they see as unnecessary government spending.
Already, cuts to the National Science Foundation have resulted in firings at the office that manages Arctic and Antarctic research, the New York Times reported, and all but five staff at the nonpartisan Wilson Center have been placed on leave and are expected to be fired. That congressionally-chartered think tank includes the Arctic- and Antarctic-focused Polar Insitute.
More recently, major proposed cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported by NPR media and some other media agencies could shutter additional research programs aimed at understanding the changing climate.
Arctic sea ice is seen from a NASA research aircraft on March 30, 2017, above Greenland. Source: Alaska Public Media, NASA photo
Margaret Williams, an Alaskan serving as a senior fellow teaching Arctic policy at the Belfer Center within the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, said last month that understanding what’s happening in the far north is important for people across the country and around the world.
The Arctic is changing so rapidly, and Arctic change has a direct impact on, certainly, Alaskans, but really on all Americans.
Williams said understanding the Arctic is important for everything from defense policy and shipping to the global food supply and weather forecasting.
This winter, Arctic sea ice covered less area at its peak than during any year in the 47-year period for which satellite data is available, according to preliminary findings from the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
Trump and Musk have said they see their mission as eliminating wasteful spending. Republican allies say the country’s ballooning national debt threatens the country’s future, necessitating sometimes painful cuts.
But Williams says cutting scientific research on the poles is likely to hurt the U.S.’s standing as a global leader.
To cut science, to cut the very important information that serves Americans, does not make us great. It makes us weak. It makes us ill-prepared. It makes us insecure and vulnerable, she said.
Asked about the cuts to various Arctic programs last month, Republican U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she worries the cuts could have a lasting impact.
“You’ve not only impacted good people that are working hard, but you may lose out on the investments that we have made in these programs over the years, and that would be a loss,” she said.
She said the cuts to polar research are especially puzzling given the president’s stated interest in acquiring the Danish semi-autonomous territory of Greenland.
The cuts have not been uniform, and in many cases, Arctic research continues apace. A spokesperson for the University of Alaska Fairbanks said the impact on their institution had so far been minimal.
There’s certainly some potential threats to funding. There’s also the potential for emerging areas of opportunity for UAF, Communications Director Marmian Grimes said in an interview, pointing to the Trump administration’s interest in Arctic oil, gas and mineral development as areas where the university’s work could expand.
At the Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies, a Department of Defense office in Anchorage, officials said they were aware that the landscape had changed but insisted their work would go on.
“Yes, there’s been some change, but our focus has maintained. It has been the same, and that’s on ensuring that the warfighter has the capabilities that they need to get their job done,” said Matthew Hickey, the center’s associate director for strategic engagement.
Even so, Kelsey Frazier, the Center’s associate director for research and analysis, said the new landscape had led non-government researchers who work with the center to change the way they talk about their work:
The conversations that we have on Friday nights or at dinner parties has really shifted more from ‘This is what I’m doing,’ to … ‘How do I explain this to other people?’ I like that, because it means that the science coming forth is going to be more relatable and more people might understand why it’s important.
Source: Alaska Public Media