导致数十亿研究资金被取消的联邦关键词列表
The federal keyword lists that canceled billions in research funding

原始链接: https://www.highereddive.com/news/inside-the-federal-keyword-lists-that-canceled-billions-in-research-funding/826203/

加州大学研究人员提起的一项诉讼揭露了特朗普政府的一场系统性运动,旨在撤销与该政府政治议程相抵触的联邦研究资助。法庭文件显示,包括国立卫生研究院(NIH)、国家科学基金会(NSF)、国防部(DOD)和国家人文基金会(NEH)在内的联邦机构,通过使用广泛的关键词过滤器而非针对单个项目进行评估来终止资助。 受影响的议题包括多元化、公平与包容(DEI),气候变化及绿色能源。各机构利用“不被看好”的术语列表——例如“结构性种族主义”、“健康公平”和“碳中和”——来识别并取消处于研究中期的项目。例如,美国国家科学基金会采纳了参议员泰德·克鲁兹报告中的术语来筛查“新马克思主义”概念,而国防部则针对与替代能源相关的项目。 加州大学研究人员指控这些行为通过压制特定观点和主题,侵犯了他们的第一修正案权利。对此,联邦法官已发布初步禁令,强制各机构恢复资助并停止大规模的终止行为。该诉讼凸显了特朗普政府依赖广泛的数字化筛选来拆解其认为意识形态不一致的学术工作,从而有效地绕过了标准的同行评审程序,转而采取出于政治动机的审查。

近期的一场 Hacker News 讨论指出,有报道称联邦机构正根据一份“不受欢迎”的关键词黑名单取消研究拨款。从“人文”、“太阳能”到“无障碍”,甚至像“不平等”这类数学术语,据称都会引发资助的立即终止。 参与者将这一政策描述为对科学研究“荒谬”且“技术官僚式”的攻击,许多人将这种严苛且受意识形态驱动的过滤手段与李森科主义等历史先例进行了比较。批评者认为,使用粗糙的关键词过滤(往往导致无关研究被误伤)不仅暴露了行政层面的严重无能,也是削弱公共研究基础设施的蓄意尝试。 尽管该政府的一些辩护者认为,纳税人的资助应与民选行政部门的目标保持一致,但评论者普遍认为,这种做法是对科学前所未有且具有破坏性的政治化。许多人指出,该政策在学术界产生了寒蝉效应,迫使研究人员不得不通过“申请技巧”来绕过自动化审查。总体而言,该讨论反映了人们对制度规范遭到侵蚀、科研环境转向依赖政治合规而非科学价值的深切担忧。
相关文章

原文

Soon after President Donald Trump retook office, researchers and academics across the country began receiving startling news. They were abruptly informed, often mid-project, that their federal grant funding had been terminated. Form letters bearing the news often offered few details beyond that their work no longer aligned with agency priorities.

As part of a lawsuit filed by University of California researchers, a handful of federal agencies confirmed earlier this month in court documents that they cut grants if researchers' projects “expressed, or were presumed to express, viewpoints disfavored by the Administration."

Those court documents offer insight into how the Trump administration undertook a swift campaign to revoke research funding for work related to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and other subjects at odds with its political agenda.

Federal agencies relied heavily on keyword searches when terminating grants held by UC researchers, court documents revealed. While the searched terms varied across agencies, they focused on initiatives facing significant conservative opposition, such as DEI and green energy.

The UC researchers allege the grant terminations violated their First Amendment rights by targeting their work based on viewpoint and subject matter and have asked the federal judge overseeing the case to rule the revocations unconstitutional.

The keyword lists used by four of the federal agencies named in the UC lawsuit — the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Defense and the National Endowment for the Humanities — elucidate the wide net cast by the Trump administration when targeting grants.

Federal agencies targeted grants focused on DEI, climate change and other topics

Keywords used by four federal agencies to identify and terminate research grants

Of the four agencies, NSF used the most keywords by far. It told the court it pulled its search terms list directly from a 2024 report released by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, which alleged the Biden administration had politicized science at the agency. NSF also mentioned, but did not list, terms related to misinformation. 

The report shared hundreds of terms it used to screen grants to determine whether they were related to DEI or promoted “neo-Marxist perspectives about enduring class struggle.” The list included "injustice," "ally," "prejudice," "institutional," "discrimination," "historically," "minority," and "traumatic."

NIH worked off of a shorter but similar list, which included “workforce diversity” and “health equity.” The agency noted that it also used “various permutations” of each keyword. 

While the Defense Department terminated grants using similar terms — such as "pay equity," "LGBTQ," and "neurodiversity" — it also sought to cut funding for projects related to climate change and green energy.

Grants that referenced alternative energy sources such as solar, wind or geothermal energy were targeted for termination, as were those that used terms like "climate change," "carbon neutrality," "decarbonization," "pollution control," "air quality management" or "federal sustainability," the department said in court documents.

Those four agencies told the court they used their keyword lists and avoided assessing each grant individually, instead identifying awards to cancel “using general criteria.” 

NSF provided a list of the grants held by UC researchers that it cut using this method but did not tie specific search terms to each terminated grant.

NEH similarly provided the court with a list of grants revoked based on keywords including "environmental justice" and “transgenderism," along with "diversity, equity, and inclusion" and its variants. But like NSF, NEH did not specify which keyword triggered each termination, though it did sometimes share portions of the grant that resulted in it being flagged.

NIH, however, did tie specific terms to cancellations in some cases.

NIH cut at least $2.6M in grant funding for projects using the phrase “structural racism”

Examples of NIH grants canceled due keyword searches

One project at the University of California, San Francisco sought to study how racism affected the mental health of adolescents and young adults who had contact with the legal system, as well as racism's impacts on substance abuse. 

Another, at the University of California, Los Angeles, focused on gestational diabetes among Asian Americans.

Both were canceled by NIH — the former was flagged for using the phrase "structural racism," and the latter for "health equality."

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com