Faculty Criticizes WSU Response To Threat Donors Shouldn’t Be Allowed To Dictate Outcome Of Research, Letter Says

Prominent donors shouldn’t be allowed to dictate the outcome of research at Washington State University, a faculty committee has told WSU President Sam Smith.

The Faculty Association for Scholarship and Research sent its letter of protest on April 21 after learning that Jacklin Seed Co. of Post Falls was threatening to withdraw support from WSU over the outcome of a recent study.

The study, conducted for the Washington Department of Ecology as part of its efforts to phase out most field burning by 1998, concluded the public benefits of reducing grass smoke outweigh costs to Kentucky bluegrass growers by several million dollars a year.

Jacklin has since softened its angry critique of the study.

“Our initial reaction to the study was admittedly too strong … We regret letting our frustration get the best of us,” Donald, Doyle and Duane Jacklin said this month in a second letter to Smith.

The protest from 14 of WSU’s leading researchers is “extraordinary,” said Bob Speth, an associate professor of pharmacology who wrote the letter as president of the faculty group.

“We wanted to convey to the administration our concern that such special interests not be able to contaminate university research,” Speth said.

Members of the group have research grants from federal, state and private sources. They are worried about escalating nationwide threats to academic freedom coming from research sponsors and other donors, Speth said.

After first hearing from the Jacklins in January, WSU announced it would sponsor an external peer review of the cost-benefit study. That’s a review conducted by academic experts not associated with the original study.

The Jacklins had recently pledged $300,000 for a new biotechnology lab, and have donated more than $100,000 in family and corporate funds to the university.

WSU’s decision to do an outside review “gives the unfortunate appearance of coercion,” Speth said.

But the Jacklins said in their second letter they aren’t trying to pressure the university.

“Let us state up front, that we remain committed to WSU and all of higher education, and acknowledge your need for absolute independent research,” the Jacklins wrote.

They also acknowledged the Washington field-burning phaseout rule will not be reversed.

WSU has already conducted an internal peer review. But it will proceed with the external review to ensure the study was conducted properly, said James Barron, chairman of the agricultural economics department.

But the lead researcher for the cost-benefit study still opposes the new review.

“It shouldn’t be done because it has the appearance of responding to moneyed interests and puts the university in a conflict of interest situation,” said Philip Wandschneider, an associate professor in WSU’s department of agricultural economics.

, DataTimes