Researcher’s Dilemma

There was an editorial some time ago in the New York Times about Virginia Commonwealth University taking money from Philip Morris for research:

In short, the article shed light on a secret deal between the tobacco giant and the university to have Philip Morris retain proprietary control, including the final say of what study results were published. The article posed the issue of accepting certain industry support in general, and it roundly condemned the forfeiture of publishing rights on research results to companies.

In a difficult economic situation, academic institutions will suffer just as the private sector has. With endowments tied to the market and reliance on large donors a vulnerability, the question becomes: what kinds of research ethics are worth fighting for? It is already a reality that campus politics does impact what kinds of research are supported; that the projects a research university pursues is in important ways tied to who is willing to financially back these studies. At the same time, you have case like that of Dr. Nemeroff from Emory University, who took huge kickbacks for consulting pharmaceutical companies.

How do we definitively draw boundaries for academic researchers versus researchers-for-hire? How can donors be encouraged to give to research that is not agenda-driven? It seems to be getting increasingly difficult.