US Science Plan Lacks Open Borders, Social Science Funding

The United States' ambition to usher in 'a new golden age for science' requires a more comprehensive approach than currently outlined by the White House, according to an analysis published in Nature on August 4, 2026. The plan, which emphasizes advancements in technology and engineering, is criticized for overlooking the essential contributions of social sciences, public health, and the humanities. Furthermore, the analysis posits that open borders are a crucial, yet absent, component of a strategy aimed at fostering scientific progress and innovation.

The Nature article highlights that a truly golden age for science necessitates not only investment in cutting-edge technological research but also a deep understanding and funding of human behavior, societal structures, and public well-being. The social sciences, including fields like sociology, psychology, and economics, provide the frameworks for understanding how scientific discoveries are integrated into society, how policies are formed, and how human factors influence technological adoption and impact. Without adequate support for these disciplines, the application and societal benefit of scientific breakthroughs may be suboptimal.

Similarly, the omission of robust public health funding is seen as a significant gap. Public health research is vital for addressing global challenges such as pandemics, chronic diseases, and environmental health risks, all of which have profound implications for scientific advancement and human prosperity. Investing in public health infrastructure and research ensures a healthier population capable of contributing to and benefiting from scientific endeavors.

The humanities, encompassing disciplines like history, philosophy, and literature, are also presented as indispensable. They offer critical perspectives on the ethical implications of scientific research, the historical context of discovery, and the cultural impact of innovation. A balanced scientific ecosystem requires the critical inquiry and contextual understanding that the humanities provide.

Beyond disciplinary funding, the analysis strongly advocates for open borders as a cornerstone of scientific advancement. Historically, the free movement of researchers, ideas, and talent has been a powerful engine for innovation. Restricting immigration and international collaboration can stifle the cross-pollination of ideas, limit access to diverse perspectives, and hinder the global scientific community's ability to tackle complex problems collectively. The article suggests that a forward-looking science policy must embrace global talent and facilitate international scientific exchange to truly achieve a "new golden age."