The United States has been the leader in fundamental research for the last seven decades. Fundamental research is overwhelming undertaken in or in conjunction with research-intensive universities, and since the 1950s they have depended on US Federal funding to make this possible. This support has been consistently championed by Congress, is popular across the political spectrum and enjoys long public backing, in no small part because there remains a widespread trust in the societal benefits it provides. Yet the US now faces a dilemma over the future of this national achievement and the supporting arrangements making it sustainable. The ‘social contract’ for science and research now looks more tentative than at any time since the Space Race. This paper examines why many US university leaders, faculty, experts and policy-makers are increasingly concerned, what is driving this and how they are responding. Building on 37 interviews with university, academic and government leaders, this study uses a mixed methodology to explore perceived institutional challenges and the politics around them, alongside the responses and strategies of US research-intensive universities in the context of global, national and regional policies. This paper examines tensions in the relationship between universities and government, and between researcher and public, combining perspectives from a sample of leading research universities and from national policy leaders to offer insight into the intersection of Federal policy and local operationalization. It concludes that for the future of US basic science and research two factors are likely to be decisive, being whether the strength of the public backing for funding university-based fundamental research continues, and how universities respond if, and in the assessment of many, when this support erodes. If the current research system is to remain viable, universities will need to make greater efforts to rebuild trust and understanding with the US public and litigate anew their raison d'etre at the center of US research.

Leadership matters for the success of large enterprises and this is also the case for higher education institutions and universities. Yet, the public nature of universities and of academia means these institutions are usually highly dependent on external actors, in particular government. Viewed through a lens of distributed leadership, this paper explores how leaders in universities, national academies and government view and rate key changes associated with this pervasive reorientation and reorganisation of public higher education. It asks where do the views of leaders within universities and those outside universities converge and diverge and what patterns are evident in the differences between leaders? Drawing on 116 in-depth interviews and 114 follow-up surveys with senior higher education leaders in Australia, of which just over half were university senior executives, this paper concludes that all leaders surveyed are largely aligned in their views of most issues.

This study provides an overview of the history, current status, and future challenges to the Australian university system through the eyes of its leaders. Hopefully, the report will be informative and useful and will raise critical and important issues that need to be considered and addressed for the continuing success of the system and the society it enables. The intended audience includes: university leaders, managers and staff; higher education policy makers and analysts; and, Australian and global higher education researchers and scholars.