The global pursuit and development of COVID-19 vaccines saw critical contributions from researchers and manufacturers around the world. Those efforts may be among the first publicly visible heralds of change within science professions and industries. Although the United States has been the world leader in scientific research and development since the early 20th century, recent data suggests that leadership in science R&D may be centered elsewhere in the future.

According to the World Economic Forum, China produced the highest number of STEM graduates globally in 2016, with 4.7 million students graduating with science, technology, engineering, or mathematics degrees there. Scientific study isn’t just growing in China. UNESCO data reveals that more than 30 percent of higher ed grads in Oman, Tunisia, Germany, Singapore, Malaysia, Algeria, Iran, Myanmar, and Belarus took a STEM degree in 2018.

Drawing on this data and other trends, the “Changing Science” ASAE ForesightWorks driver of change action brief forecasts that, in coming years, the majority of the scientific workforce and global R&D spending will be in East and South Asia. These new centers of scientific research will reflect the cultures and priorities of the countries in which they are based—or those of funders or corporate interests.

But the global shifts aren’t the only changes facing modern science. While American scientific research has been primarily located within universities, government research centers, and corporations, the “Changing Science” action brief identifies the potential for citizen science—scientific pursuits by nonprofessional scientists—to disrupt who is considered a scientist and how professionals connect with the public.

Confront Change With Action

To deal with these disruptions, the brief provides a number of recommendations for science-focused organizations. But science won’t be the only field facing disruption in the future.

As various professions and industries grow globally, and as nonprofessionals pursue channels to engage with industries and professions in new ways, leaders may find their field growing in new corners of the world, nontraditional stakeholders getting involved, or other shifts that challenge their traditional ways of working. The recommendations in “Changing Science” provide a broad starting point for any organization facing disruption in the field it serves.

Raise the public profile of science and scientists—or the professionals in your field. The action brief notes that associations often hold a position of trust within their communities and can therefore broaden the public perception of their profession or industry. For science associations, elevating the value of evidence-based information and depoliticizing science are critical. Other kinds of organizations may gain traction by highlighting how the knowledge, skills, and expertise of their members affect everyday lives.

Form new partnerships. While associations have a commitment to supporting the professional community they serve, disruptions offer an opportunity to bring various groups together around a common goal. The brief specifically calls on science organizations to serve as conveners of funders, producers, and consumers of science and data, including other associations, but all types of associations have found value in convening and forging partnerships. Responding to change provides an opportunity to gather diverse perspectives and bring new stakeholders into the fold.

Focus on the professional pipeline. The brief recommends that scientific organizations develop connections with future scientists early, particularly in underrepresented communities. Depending on your field, this may mean creating training for elementary or secondary school teachers or making connections between your field and diverse occupations—for example, connections between chemistry and cooking. New and evolving skills, like working with robots, may serve as training opportunities and as methods for engaging potential professionals in nontraditional ways.