Science à la Carte century.” Three years later, the same publication offered a more som-
ber outlook, pointing out the unintended consequences that “makes
American academic institutions behave more like businesses than
neutral arbiters of truth.”
Whatever policy makers intended with the Bayh-Dole Act, the
platform for science to support food production had been significantly
altered. Public funding was more limited and competitive. Federal
programs had been launched to accelerate licensing, startup ventures,
and patent applications. The pendulum for science had swung decid-
edly toward research that promised rewards with “measurable societal
impacts.” Funding for (basic) research that lacked identifiable payoffs
and unknown timelines had become more difficult to secure.
When I was a graduate student, pendulum swings in research funding
were not on my radar. But returning to academia two decades later,
I couldn’t help but notice the pressure on faculty to secure external
research funding. Within a year of returning, I was invited to speak at
Iowa State University on trends I saw that were reshaping food. As part
of my visit, I met with faculty across several departments, including a
professor who oversaw a research laboratory.
As part of exploring our common interests, he gave me a brief
rundown of research under way in his lab. When I probed as to which
research topics brought the most personal satisfaction, he said that while
they all served a purpose, none reminded him of why he had become
a scientist in the first place. Intrigued, I asked him why. After all, he
was a tenured professor and seemingly well positioned to pursue his
own path.
He shared with me that his passion for science was rooted in exploring
the unknown. As a student, he had been enchanted with understanding
nature. A few professors recognized his interest and encouraged him
to pursue graduate school. Early in his career as a new university scien-
tist, life was good. He brought in research funding to supplement what
the university provided and collaborated with colleagues near and far.
By reading peer-reviewed journals he stayed current on the advances
of others and likewise contributed his own findings for review and
publication. He fit the mold of stereotypical scientists outfitted in white