In September 2025, I moved from Washington, D.C. to Vienna, Austria to take the role of journalist-in-residence at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA).

What strikes me already is how different the mood is here. In Europe, there’s momentum — investments, innovative projects, new partnerships. At the same time, back in Washington, science credibility and budgets are in trouble, and support for international collaboration is thin.

Put together, that void should worry us.

History shows that when the U.S. steps back from global science, we don’t just lose influence — we lose the chance to shape solutions to problems that affect us all.

IIASA itself is proof of how research without borders can work. The institute was founded in 1972, at the height of the Cold War, as a neutral ground for U.S. and Soviet scientists. While leaders clashed, researchers here quietly modeled energy systems, analyzed pollution, and built trust that informed arms control and the Montreal Protocol. It wasn’t glamorous, but it got results. Science created a bridge where politics could not. Now, the U.S. risks losing that bridge.

The European Union is luring U.S. scientists by investing millions into research and new joint programs. Philanthropies are partnering with institutions here to push new research forward. The world’s scientific gravity is shifting.

The danger of U.S. disengagement in science isn’t abstract. What’s often lost in budget debates and isolationist trajectory is our global standing in science diplomacy; that is, using scientific expertise to inform diplomatic processes and inform decisions. If we pull back, we don’t only weaken our standing — we cut ourselves off from knowledge.

History shows that when the U.S. steps back from global science, we don’t just lose influence — we lose the chance to shape solutions to problems that affect us all.

Remember acid rain? It took U.S. and European scientists working together to prove where it came from and how to fix it. Remember COVID-19? Without global data sharing, those vaccines wouldn’t have arrived nearly as fast.  

Extreme weather, natural hazards, water, food security, AI and other technology, and biodiversity loss all transcend borders. To drive solutions, the U.S. benefits from global collaborations through access to new breakthroughs, faster responses, and  fresh opportunities.

Being here, in this historic “Schloss” just outside Vienna, makes that point vivid. IIASA isn’t about the Ivory Tower or lofty declarations. It’s about applied research that countries can use — whether that’s modeling how to balance energy grids during the green transition, or mapping health risks and finance for health ministries as heat waves, floods and wildfires intensify. Scientists from more than 20 countries are at the table, including from the Global South. 

Recently, leaders in science diplomacy from across the Middle East and North Africa convened at IIASA to explore regional collaboration on water, technology, and governance. Senior diplomats, scientists, NGOs and technology companies met in closed-door discussions under Chatham House Rule. Their engagement underscored the urgency of global scientific cooperation. Yet, just one scientist came from the U.S.; the other fifty-nine participants joined from Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Qatar, Morocco, Palestine, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Australia, and European countries. 

The world’s scientific gravity is shifting.

Despite U.S. thought leadership in water research and governance, the virtual absence of Americans at the convening speaks volumes. While other regions are actively investing in science as a tool of diplomacy and soft power, the U.S. risks losing influence in shaping the norms and networks that will define future cooperation.

As a founding member of IIASA, the U.S. still has the talent, institutions, and global clout to lead in science. That means U.S. scientists need to be supported in their global collaborations, not cut off or silenced by shrinking budgets. It means philanthropy and government alike should recognize that science diplomacy isn’t some feel-good add-on; it’s a communication tool for solving the very crises that define our century.

When IIASA was founded, collaboration across the Iron Curtain looked impossible. Yet scientists proved that shared research could advance knowledge even when politics froze.

Still, IIASA brings together members from across the world — including China, India, South Korea, Japan, sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, the United States, Canada, and many others — reflecting the global reach and diversity needed to tackle complex problems.

International science partnerships, whether in Vienna or Nairobi, in London or São Paulo, are assets for the U.S. Let’s treat them that way. With so much at stake, the U.S. cannot afford to recede from the global exchange of knowledge. Science across borders doesn’t just solve problems; it sustains cooperation.

Lisa Palmer is the author of Hot, Hungry Planet: The Fight to Stop a Food Crisis in the Face of Climate Change and currently serves as Journalist-in-Residence and Senior Research Scholar in Science Communication at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Laxenburg, Austria. She has spent more than two decades reporting and writing on the intersection of science, society, and the environment, covering issues such as climate change, food security, sustainability, biodiversity, and cities for major U.S. and international publications. She has worked and been supported by the Pulitzer Center, the Wilson Center, and National Geographic. She has also educated the next generation of science communicators at The George Washington University and Georgetown University. Across her career, she has advanced the public understanding of complex environmental challenges through compelling narrative journalism, education, and global collaboration.