Article

America’s future innovation depends in large part on our ability to fully tap a richly diverse talent pool, and a Supreme Court case involving the University of Texas at Austin could undermine that goal.

Coming up with the next Google search engine, life-saving diagnostic tools, or medical treatments will depend on novel ideas from diverse sources. Discovery works best when everyone brings fresh insights to the process. Scientist Joseph DeSimone, the holder of more than 130 patents for his inventions, explains it this way: “When you surround yourself with people that know exactly what you know, you’re at a disadvantage in the innovation process.”

Let’s hope innovation goals will be considered in the Texas case. At risk is the ability of U.S. universities to promote diversity by making limited use of race in admissions. Lawyers for Abigail Fisher, who is white, argue that she was unfairly denied access to the University of Texas because she had to compete against African-Americans and Hispanics in a process that used race as one consideration in a “holistic” review of applicants. Such consideration was upheld by a 2003 Supreme Court decision, citing the “compelling interest” of universities to pursue diversity on campus.

Nowhere is that interest more compelling than in the U.S. science and engineering fields – particularly as federal support for basic science is at risk, and seven other countries are already spending more on science, as a share of their economies.

DeSimone, a distinguished professor of chemistry at the University of North Carolina and winner of a National Institutes of Health Director’s Pioneer Award, said he learned the relationship between diversity and innovation early in his career. Invited to join an “innovation team” at a major chemical company, he said he quickly noticed that the team—“all white guys” with similar backgrounds—was hampered by an inability to think about problems in novel ways. So, DeSimone established his own team, incorporating a wide variety of scientific disciplines and with about half of the students representing underrepresented minorities.

Much-lauded scientist S. James Gates, Jr., describes similar observations. As a theoretical physicist known for his work on supersymmetry, supergravity and super string theory, he is keenly aware of the creativity and imagination required to go beyond what is known, to posit theories and then to test their value. Gates attributes the greatest potential for such creativity and imagination to the most widely diverse field of thinkers. “When individuals from groups that face traditional biases in our society are excluded or inadequately represented, we limit the potential for achievement, discovery, innovation, and learning in the sciences,” he has written. “I argue this limits the robustness of the scientific enterprise as a whole.”

American industry seems to agree that diversity has a positive influence on innovation. Fifty-seven Fortune 100 companies and other leading businesses, collectively representing trillions of dollars in revenue, filed an amicus brief in Fisher v. University of Texas “to reaffirm the significance of diversity in higher education to America’s largest businesses.” Graduates of diverse educational institutions, the brief states, “have an increased ability to facilitate unique and creative approaches to problem-solving by integrating different perspectives and moving beyond linear, conventional thinking.” The brief argues that diverse universities are especially important in difficult economic times. “Competition becomes more intense, and there is a greater need to think creatively and come up with innovative approaches.”

Petitioners in the Texas case argue that race-conscious admissions hurt, rather than help, minority applicants. Their claims are not supported by scientific studies of race-conscious programs. An amicus brief filed by the American Educational Research Association (AERA), signed by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), states, “The claim that stigma increases under affirmative action programs and the claim that students suffer academic harms when their admissions credentials do not ‘match’ their institutions find almost no support in the scientific literature.” Furthermore, as the AERA brief notes, not only does campus diversity help minority students, it has been shown to improve the learning environment for all students because many perspectives help propel discoveries.

From city neighborhoods to suburban and rural America, scientific know-how and untapped potential have many faces. Young people from each of these settings bring unique perspectives to the classroom and the workplace. By cultivating a broader base of ideas in science and engineering, we foster the novel thinking – and innovation – upon which our best hopes for the future depend.

Alan I. Leshner is chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and executive publisher of the journal Science. Shirley Malcom is director of Education and Human Resources at AAAS.