What the New Gold Standard Science EO Means for Emerging Technology Development
The Trump Administration Goes for Gold
On Friday May 23rd, many Americans were looking for ways to leave work early. It was the precipice of a long weekend traditionally marking the beginning of summer and the cookout season. With burgers and cold beers dancing in their heads, they may have missed it. The latest Trump Administration executive order, Restoring Gold Standard Science, came out the same day. The executive order seeks to “restore the American people’s faith in the scientific enterprise and institutions that create and apply scientific knowledge in service of the public good.” The EO is not specific to emerging technology development or deployment, but its requirements will have trickle down effects on technology innovation, specifically on research and development (R&D). This EO is really about changing the lens through which we view scientific pursuits to include technology development. It’s also about how scientific data and results are communicated to stakeholders and the public. Federal R&D funding is part of the story. This EO is also about how the federal government views scientific progress agnostic of application. Here, we will take a look trends in R&D funding in the federal government to look at how this EO will impact emerging technology development. Hopefully, you have a few leftover burgers to enjoy while we talk federal budgets.
What’s in the EO
The EO cites a loss of public trust in scientific results and blames the federal government for contributing to the loss. It cites science around the COVID-19 pandemic, National Marine Fisheries court case, and the use of the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenario 8.5 as examples of poor science. A debate about the scientific merits of any of these examples is outside the scope of this piece, but the context under which the EO was written is informative. Based on these examples, the EO demands that “science be conducted in a manner that is..”
Reproducible
Transparent
Communicative of error and uncertainty
Collaborative and interdisciplinary
Skeptical of its findings and assumptions
Structured for falsifiability of hypotheses
Subject to unbiased peer review
Accepting of negative results as positive outcomes
Without conflicts of interest
The order does not provide metrics or definitions on how the federal government will judge whether any scientific results conform to any/all of the above parameters. However, the order does direct the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to issue guidance to federal agencies on the implementation of “gold standard science” within 30 days. The release of this guidance will give the scientific community important insights into how grants and funding will be provided and how the federal government will purchase technology. We should expect to see hallmarks of this order not only in federal R&D funding but also in contracting language and grant applications related to science and technology. A word on federal R&D funding.
Federal R&D Funding
Emerging technology projects often begin as R&D projects in a lab with emphasis on the “R.” Since peaking in 1964, the federal government share of R&D funding has steadily fallen as a percentage of GDP from 67% of all R&D funding to just 18% as of 2022. The private sector has picked up the slack significantly over that time, but federally funded R&D projects for defense and health have been relatively steady and many technology innovations have been developed and commercialized as a result.
While the proportion of federal R&D funding has fallen steadily, funding for defense projects remains high. Projections of the 2025 budget place DoD in command of 46% of all federal R&D funding. Health and Human Services is projected to command 25% of the 2025 federally funded R&D budget leaving only 29% to be spread across other agencies and mission areas. Six agencies consistently receive about 95% of federal R&D funding:
Department of Defense
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Energy
NASA
National Science Foundation
Department of Agriculture
Looking across all agencies at R&D funding between 2023 and 2025, there are significant cuts to even the core R&D recipients:
Federal R&D Funding by Agency (FY2023-FY2025)
(Values in millions of current dollars)
While the table above shows an overall 3.8% increase in funding, there are notable declines in R&D funding at NASA, USDA, Commerce, Veterans Affairs, and DHS. DHS’s $90M cut from 2023-2025 represents a full 14.2% reduction against a critical mission area.
The Gold Standard Science EO is not about R&D, at least not directly. Taken together with trends in federal R&D funding, a pattern emerges. Federal R&D spending, outside of DoD and HHS, is largely declining. For those R&D projects that remain, the Gold Standard Science EO will play a significant part in future grants and contracts. Technology developers should be mindful that what federal R&D dollars remain will be subject to the order’s requirements for integrity and communication of results. The full implementation of the EO is not out yet, but organizations should start building some core principles into their proposals and RFP responses now.
What it All Means
The order applies only to federal agencies, but its implications will drive far and wide in the emerging technology community. The test that OSTP will need to pass is whether the requirements to prove scientific results are aligned with the order’s core requirements can be implemented in a way that protects intellectual property and gives innovators the latitude they need to fail, learn, and iterate on a scientific finding. All scientific projects should be approached with skepticism and should communicate uncertainty or errors at any phase. That skepticism should lead researchers to find ways to disprove their beliefs rather than prove their biases. Most scientists would agree with this and hold the integrity of their scientific methods sacred. This order imposes a level of federal government control over scientific research that could have real consequences for technology development and the government’s ability to acquire and operate it.
Federal agencies are already facing cuts to R&D budgets outside of DoD and HHS. What money is left will be difficult to obtain for private and academic institutions engaging in R&D. On top of the shrinking pool, the standards are changing. Love them or leave them, they will require a change in how technology is developed and operated.
Operationally, technology that collects data would likely be subject to these requirements depending on OSTP’s implementation plan. Findings will be subject to increased scrutiny requiring more transparency in what is or may become protected intellectual property. OSTP should take care to ensure the protection of critical IP at a time when nation-state adversaries are actively engaged in IP theft from US companies and researchers.
Finally, communication of results will be considerably different following this order. While errors and uncertainty have always been a part of the scientific process, those aspects will likely receive increased attention following this order. Organizations will need to employ specific communications plans for direct stakeholders and for the public to comply with the requirements of the EO. The effective communication of scientific and technical information is an art. Some do it well, others do not. This will require the private sector to invest in communication, so results are communicated accurately and in a way that is understandable broadly.
The Gold Standard Science EO has noble goals even if its context is subject to debate. The important part of the EO is that it be viewed in context with trends in federal R&D funding. These two issues together form a way for universities and private companies to understand the landscape of federal technology requirements and how their proposals and results will be judged.
How that your belly is full of leftover Memorial Day burgers and your brain is full of federal policy and budget knowledge, my job is done here. I will follow up on this post once the OSTP implementation plan is released. Happy Belated Memorial Day and thank you to all who served and made the ultimate sacrifice.
Connect with us: Substack, LinkedIn, Bluesky, X, Website
To learn more about the AI products we offer, please visit our product page.
Nick Reese is the cofounder and COO of Frontier Foundry and an adjunct professor of emerging technology at NYU. He is a veteran and a former US government policymaker on cyber and technology issues. Visit his LinkedIn here.