STM statement on proposed revisions to U.S. federal funding regulations affecting publication and dissemination of federally funded research

STM strongly opposes the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s proposed revisions to the Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance. We stand with colleagues across the library, university, and research communities in warning that these provisions will undermine the independent, rigorous system that has made American science the envy of the world.  

The United States has long been a global leader not only because it funds research, but because it supports the system that makes research credible, discoverable, and usable. That system depends on independent review, freedom from political interference, and the ability to communicate findings effectively and without bias. OMB’s proposal risks breaking the core conditions required for independent, trustworthy research. 

By shifting decisions away from evidence-based assessment toward administrative and political judgement, the proposal risks weakening the independent system of checks and balances that govern how research is evaluated and shared. It introduces uncertainty into processes designed to ensure research is rigorous, transparent, and trustworthy. Grantees need to know that their work will be evaluated without bias, and that they can plan and deliver complete research projects without fear of political interference or arbitrary termination. 

The proposal’s restrictions on publication and dissemination risk limiting the reach and impact of federally funded research and inserts political decision-making into what should be an independent system. Research is not complete at the point of discovery – it achieves value only when findings are validated, communicated, and made accessible. This is how clinicians access evidence to inform care, innovators identify new technologies, policymakers make informed decisions, and the public benefits from the research it funds. Funding for publication and subscriptions is essential to ensure research delivers public value and researchers can build on the latest discoveries and knowledge. 

The changes would jeopardize American scientific leadership on the global stage. Modern science depends on the free exchange of ideas and collaboration across borders to address the world’s most complex challenges. Restricting collaboration risks isolating US researchers, slowing down the pace and impact of US-led scientific progress. 

OMB’s rule would introduce bias and instability into a system that depends on objectivity. This is fundamentally incompatible with serious, trustworthy scientific research and directly at odds with the stated ambitions of ‘Gold Standard Science.’ STM urges a reconsideration of these proposals to ensure continued support for the systems that underpin trusted research.  

Comment here by July 13

STM responds to proposed revisions to U.S. federal funding regulations affecting publication and dissemination of federally funded research

In response to a Nature News request for comment on the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s  proposed revisions to U.S. federal funding regulations affecting publication and dissemination of federally funded research, STM CEO Caroline Sutton said:

“We remain baffled by the idea that publishing research could be seen as anything other than central to agency goals. Research only delivers public value when it is published and shared in forms and formats that enable impact. Publication costs (around ~1% of total research investment) support the systems and expertise that ensure high-quality research is trusted, accessible, and usable. Removing or restricting that support doesn’t save money; it risks weakening U.S. scientific competitiveness, adding bureaucracy, and undermining the independent exchange of ideas that underpins high-quality research.

We are also surprised that the government wouldn’t want funded researchers to have access to high-quality validated information to inform their research. Access to the trusted scholarly record makes sure researchers can build on existing knowledge, rather than going down known dead ends or wasting time recreating what is already known.

Taken together with restrictions on publication costs, limiting the use of federal funds for journal subscriptions undermines the essential infrastructure that makes research discoverable, accessible, and usable. Libraries and access systems are how researchers, clinicians, and policymakers engage with the evidence. Weakening both the ability to publish and the ability to access research risks eroding the knowledge engine that delivers the value of publicly funded science.”

STM is continuing to engage members to comment and urges others to do so ahead of the deadline of July 13.

Comment here

In the media | Research Professional News: “Retractions for honest mistakes ‘should be celebrated'”

How do we strengthen trust in the scholarly record at a time of rapid technological change and increasing pressures on researchers?

In an interview with Research Professional News, STM CEO Caroline Sutton discusses the need for a more constructive culture around research retractions. She urges for clearer distinctions between honest mistakes and “manipulative” behaviour.

She discusses:

  • Why “honourable” retractions should be celebrated, not stigmatised
  • The rise of AI‑generated and manipulated images in submissions
  • Growing risks around identity manipulation in digital publishing
  • The need for inclusive, globally workable verification systems
  • Why safeguarding a trusted scholarly record is a collective responsibility

Read the full interview: “Retractions for honest mistakes ‘should be celebrated'”

STM welcomes the adoption of the Council Recommendation on a European framework for science diplomacy

On June 1, the Council of the European Union adopted a Recommendation on the first-ever European framework for science diplomacy. 

At a time of increasing geopolitical complexity, the EU’s commitment to strengthening international research collaboration, promoting trust in science, and fostering international cooperation that is open, trusted and secure is both timely and important.

Scholarly publishing plays a critical role in enabling global cooperation, safeguarding the integrity, reliability and traceability of the scientific record, and supporting the responsible use of emerging technologies such as AI in science.

We look forward to engaging with policymakers and partners to help ensure that Europe’s science diplomacy ambitions are underpinned by robust, trusted, and sustainable knowledge systems.