Minerva - NSF/DoD Joint Solicitation

NSF recently signed a memorandum of understanding with the DoD, allowing collaboration between the two agencies, and has just announced a joint solicitation for proposals in the tune of $8 million. The stated goals of the program are “1) to develop the DoD’s social and human science intellectual capital in order to enhance its ability to address future challenges; 2) to enhance the DoD’s engagement with the social science community; and 3) to deepen the understanding of the social and behavioral dimensions of national security issues.”

Although we are pleased with NSF's involvement in Minerva, additional clarification is needed about the extent of DoD's role in the selection and review process. AAA is also concerned that only a portion of Minerva funding is being routed through NSF.

Share your thoughts on Minerva in our comment section below.

Links:

AAA letter regarding Minerva [pdf]

"Military's Social Science Grants Raise Alarm" ~ Washington Post

"When Professors Go to War" ~ Hugh Gusterson

"Pentagon Shift on 'Minerva'" ~ Inside Higher Ed

"Anthropology Association Urges Government to Tread Cautiously With 'Minerva' Project" ~ The Chronicle of Higher Education

"Academics Target Pentagon's Social Science Project" ~ Wired's Danger Room,

"AAA Issues Statement on Minerva" ~ Savage Minds

DoD Defense Bloggers Roundtable Regarding Minerva [pdf]

Secrecy on the Rise

Federal policy dictates that "fundamental" research should remain unclassified. However, according to a report released by the Council on Government Relations and the Association of American Universities, federal agencies appear to be incorporating more restrictive clauses into research grants and contracts. The report found 180 instances of restrictive language at 20 research institutions in 2007, a substantial increase from the 138 found in a 2003-2004 survey. The majority of restrictions are from the Defense Department, but other agencies have also made use of them. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Pentagon officials, called upon the DoD, as well as other agencies, to back off the restrictive language. Gates has ensured universities that research funded by the Minerva Project will remain unclassified. But we still advise all scholars to look for secrecy clauses prior to accepting any grants or contracts.

Please comment below if you've encountered these clauses before and have any advice for our readers.

Minerva & NSF

The Pentagon has launched a program called the Minerva Research Initiative that would fund university-based social scientists to study topics of interest to the Department of Defense, such as the Chinese military and religious fundamentalism. The AAA expressed its concerns about Minerva in a letter to Washington, and urged the Pentagon to coordinate with the National Science Foundation and other agencies that have extensive experience in peer-review and are familiar with the ethical standards and concerns of our discipline. The Pentagon was apparently listening. Pentagon officials signed an agreement with NSF last week enabling the two agencies to collaborate on approving Minerva-funded social science research. Still, there are concerns within the discipline that research will only be used when it supports the Pentagon’s agenda. AAA will continue to follow Minerva closely and will issue updates on this blog.

If you feel strongly about the program, please feel free to comment below.

Minerva Ignores AAA Concerns

The Pentagon issued a call for research proposals for the Minerva Project, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported today. Although there is no mention of coordinating with the NSF, the Pentagon has said, "The Minerva program is likely to be closely coordinated with the National Science Foundation."

The AAA previously issued a response to the proposed Minerva Project, in which it expressed concerns about the very same review process that the Pentagon describes in its announcement. The Association will continue to urge the Pentagon to coordinate with agencies (NSF, NIH, NEH) that have extensive experience in peer-review and are familiar with the rigorous standards of our discipline.

Links:
Pentagon kicks off social science consortium (Wired's Danger Room Blog)
AAA Responds to Proposed Minerva Consortium (AAA Public Affairs Blog)

AAA Responds to Proposed Minerva Consortium

In a recent letter (below) to the White House’s Office of Management of Budget, the AAA has called for a redirection of funding and management of the "Minerva Consortia," a Defense Department program which aims to support social science research in critical security areas such as Iraqi and terrorist perspectives and Chinese military and technology studies.

The letter, authored by AAA President Setha M. Low on behalf of the AAA, supports the overall mission of the Minerva program—to use humanities and social science research to promote a reduction in armed conflict. Yet Low argues that organizations such as the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Health and the National Endowment for the Humanities would be more effective in funding and managing the project and in reaching out to key scholars.

“Rigorous, balanced and objective peer review is the bedrock of successful and productive programs that sponsor academic research. Agencies such as NSF, NIH and NEH have decades of experience in building an infrastructure of respected peer-reviewers who referee individual grant proposals and give their time on selected panels,” wrote Low.

Low also warned that a program funded by the Defense Department might accept scholars who are not familiar with disciplinary standards, and might fail to attract some key experts that are unfamiliar with Defense Department funding processes.

Readers are encouraged to voice their thoughts on Project Minerva and our response to the proposed program in the comments section below.

Related Links:
AAA Minerva Letter [pdf]
Chronicle of Higher Ed Blog Posting
Inside Higher Ed Article
Wired Magazine's Danger Room Blog Posting
Savage Minds Blog Posting