Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
News

In New Pentagon-NSF Grants, Social Scientists See Reason for Hope and Caution

By David Glenn October 4, 2009

In a widely discussed speech in April 2008, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates called for a new spirit of cooperation between the military and academe. He envisioned “consortia of universities that will promote research in specific areas,” including studies of the Chinese military and radical Islamic movements.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

In a widely discussed speech in April 2008, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates called for a new spirit of cooperation between the military and academe. He envisioned “consortia of universities that will promote research in specific areas,” including studies of the Chinese military and radical Islamic movements.

The proposal was met enthusiastically by some university leaders, but social-science organizations have been skeptical. If the Pentagon starts to pour money into social-science research, some fear, whole subfields might see their priorities distorted as researchers shift their interests to work on projects that suit the military’s curiosities.

Mr. Gates’s vision—which is broadly known as the “Minerva Initiative"—came a step closer to reality on Friday, when the National Science Foundation announced 17 national-security-related social-science projects that will receive grants under a special agreement between the science foundation and the Department of Defense. The research proposals were solicited and reviewed by the science foundation, but the money—a total of $8-million—will come from the Pentagon. (In a parallel program that does not involve the science foundation, the Pentagon announced large awards for seven other social-science projects last December.)

The awardees announced Friday include 13 political scientists, five economists, three sociologists, two psychologists, two computer scientists, one linguist, and one communication scholar. (The numbers total more than 17 because several of the projects have more than one principal investigator.)

The group includes a few prominent senior scholars, including Robert L. Powell, a professor of political science at the University of California at Berkeley who is known for his game-theoretic models of international conflict, and Martha Crenshaw, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation who has been studying terrorist organizations since the 1970s. But most of the awardees are near the beginning of their careers.

Broad Research Topics

If some skeptics were worried that the Pentagon would invest only in projects that are narrowly tied to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, there is not much evidence of such bias in the new awards. One project will look at conflicts over water resources and the successes and limits of “river treaties” over the last 60 years. Another will explore how political leaders manipulate the public’s perceptions of external threats. Yet another will examine how the process of ending a war has changed over the last two centuries.

“This is a serious group of researchers pursuing problems that genuinely have connections to national security,” says Craig Calhoun, president of the Social Science Research Council. (Several months ago, the council sponsored a lengthy online debate about the Minerva project.)

But Mr. Calhoun and others say that while the quality and topical diversity of the awards may be fine, there is also a certain methodological narrowness. Most of the awards went to projects involving techniques that do not necessarily require deep knowledge of a particular nation or region. Instead, the projects are attempts to build quasi-universal models of governments’ and citizens’ behavior, using game-theoretic modeling, computer simulations, social-network analysis, or large-scale databases of historical events.

“You have to look at the list for the kinds of work it doesn’t represent as well as for the work it does,” Mr. Calhoun says. “We should be concerned about other kinds of knowledge—knowledge based on anthropology and fieldwork, knowledge from historically and culturally oriented area studies, and so forth.” (One of the science foundation’s 17 projects will involve substantial fieldwork. Cynthia Buckley, an associate professor of Slavic and Eurasian studies at the University of Texas at Austin, was awarded nearly $1-million to direct a study of workers who migrate to Russia from Central Asia and Vietnam.)

Ronald R. Krebs, an associate professor of political science at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, shares Mr. Calhoun’s concern, though he notes that it is impossible to know whether anthropologists and area specialists simply chose not to apply for Minerva grants. Officials at the NSF did not immediately reply to questions about the number and nature of applications they received.

ADVERTISEMENT

“This is not necessarily an effect of Minerva,” Mr. Krebs says. “This is a longstanding complaint about the science foundation among some social scientists. There is not much federal support for case studies, for area studies. What the government is looking for is broad rules of thumb or ‘covering laws’ of international and comparative politics that can then be deployed in new cases. So when the government confronts a new civil war, a new regime transition, a new genocide, it wants to have a set of guidelines from scholarship as to how it should behave in those circumstances.”

Mr. Krebs emphasizes that he does not scorn the search for broad empirical lessons about international relations. But he does fear that the federal government is failing to support—or even to notice—scholarship that is based on deep knowledge about a single nation or conflict.

“They’re seeking to eliminate the particularities of situations in the quest for general laws about how the world works,” he says. “When we say something is a civil war, how similar is it, actually, to other civil wars? And are the aspects that make it unique perhaps the aspects that make all the difference?”

Missing ‘Jolt’

Hugh Gusterson, a professor of cultural studies at George Mason University who has been one of the most prominent skeptics of the military’s recent fondness for social science, says that his initial response to the list is that “the American taxpayers are not quite getting their money’s worth here.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“You would have hoped that there would be far more people who knew about the Middle East,” Mr. Gusterson says. “You would have hoped for much more diversity of method here. The people one could think of who might really be able to give Pentagon thinking a jolt and explain how things look from the point of view of disaffected people in the Middle East—I just don’t see them here. I don’t see this assemblage of scholarship as likely to make the Pentagon think in a really fresh way. That’s not to say it’s bad scholarship. But this is the usual suspects.”

While Mr. Gusterson despairs, Mr. Calhoun, of the research council, is modestly hopeful that the Minerva program will evolve into a productive collaboration between the military and academe.

“So far there’s been much more argument about whether this is a good idea than about developing norms for the relationship,” Mr. Calhoun says. “We have a fair amount of repair work to do to build trust.”

Mr. Calhoun says the Pentagon should not underestimate the amount of legitimate reluctance that exists among social scientists. The U.S. military has been so dominant internationally for so long, he says, that many scholars reasonably worry that they will be tainted as government agents if they accept money from the military.

Still, Mr. Calhoun would like to see the process continue. “I’ve had conversations with people at the Defense Department who indicate that they would like to fund this research on a continuous and long-term basis,” he says “I give credit to Secretary Gates for getting this going, because he recognized a gap in what the government was supporting.”

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Scholarship & Research
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
About the Author
David Glenn
David Glenn joined The Chronicle of Higher Education in 2002. His work explored how faculty members are trained, encouraged, and evaluated as teachers; how college courses and curricula are developed; and the institutional incentives that sometimes discourage faculty members from investing their energy in teaching.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Protesters attend a demonstration in support of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, March 10, 2025, in New York.
First Amendment Rights
Noncitizen Professors Testify About Chilling Effect of Others’ Detentions
Photo-based illustration of a rock preciously suspended by a rope over three beakers.
Broken Promise
U.S. Policy Made America’s Research Engine the Envy of the World. One President Could End That.
Wednesday, June 11, 2025 Tucson, Arizona—Doctor Andrew Capaldi poses for a portrait at his lab at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona on Wednesday, June 11, 2025. CREDIT: Ash Ponders for Chronicle
Capaldi Lab—
Research Expenses
What Does It Cost to Run a Lab?
Research illustration Microscope
Dreams Deferred
How Trump’s Cuts to Science Funding Are Derailing Young Scholars’ Careers

From The Review

University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky
Photo-based illustration depicting a close-up image of a mouth of a young woman with the letter A over the lips and grades in the background
The Review | Opinion
When Students Want You to Change Their Grades
By James K. Beggan
Photo-based illustration of a student and a professor, each occupying a red circle in a landscape of scribbles.
The Review | Opinion
Meet Students Where They Are? Maybe Not.
By Mark Horowitz

Upcoming Events

Chronfest25_Virtual-Events_Page_862x574.png
Chronicle Festival: Innovation Amid Uncertainty
07-16-Advising-InsideTrack - forum assets v1_Plain.png
The Evolving Work of College Advising
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin