Nasa made some big changes on Monday. They decided to close the office of their chief scientist and two other departments, including one focused on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA). These moves are part of a broad effort to improve efficiency at the space agency.
Janet Petro, Nasa’s acting administrator, shared the news in a memo. The office of technology, policy, and strategy, which provides important advice to Nasa’s leadership, was also shut down. Some workers were laid off as a result. Petro presented these cuts as a way to align with current administration goals, suggesting that DEIA initiatives were not effective.
This decision raised eyebrows because it coincides with Nasa promoting its goal to land the first woman and a person of color on the moon with its Artemis missions. Critics are likely to question how cutting DEIA support fits with this ambitious vision.
Petro encouraged staff to adapt to these changes, describing them as an opportunity to reorganize and meet legal requirements while keeping the agency effective and efficient. She acknowledged that such significant changes can be tough and urged everyone to focus on their shared mission.
Many see the closure of the chief scientist’s office as a setback for Nasa’s climate initiatives. Dr. Kate Calvin, the agency’s current chief scientist and senior climate adviser, had a key role in guiding Nasa’s research on climate change, which she highlighted in her appointment announcement in early 2022. At that time, she emphasized the challenges posed by climate change and Nasa’s leadership in this critical area.
The closing of the DEIA office is striking, especially given that Nasa was recently active in promoting diversity in STEM fields. Just last September, they collaborated with the NAACP to support underrepresented students, which stands in contrast to the recent cuts described by Petro as necessary due to perceived inefficiencies.
The office dedicated to technology, policy, and strategy was launched in 2021 to bring together experts and enhance the decision-making process at Nasa. Its closure is seen as a significant loss, especially among those who valued its critical insights into Nasa’s policy-making.
Feedback on social media has leaned heavily towards criticism of these cuts. Astrophysicist Grant Tremblay voiced concerns, stating that while some reform at Nasa was needed, such drastic eliminations were excessive. He recognized Nasa as a beloved institution, noting that the cuts could fundamentally change the agency. “It’s hard to build something great from a pile of ash and rubble,” he commented, highlighting the lasting impact of losing valued staff and expertise.
