In June 2025, an extensive investigation revealed the illegal trade of timber from protected areas in the Congolese rainforest into neighboring Burundi. Award-winning Burundian journalist Arthur Bizimana and his colleague Martin Leku took significant risks by venturing deep into the rainforest, the world’s second-largest, to gather information for their exclusive story on the detrimental impact of this illicit trade on the vital carbon sink. Their investigation was made possible through financial support from InfoNile, a journalism network focusing on cross-border investigations in the Nile Basin, and Global Forest Watch, a data platform funded by the United Nations Environment Programme and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), among others.
The funding landscape for investigative journalism, especially in the realm of science reporting, is facing significant challenges. With grants from philanthropic donors dwindling due to cuts in international development and health budgets, journalists like Bizimana and Leku are finding it increasingly difficult to hold those in power accountable. Marius Dragomir, a prominent Romanian journalist, describes the funding threats to science journalism as a “disaster” at a time when balanced reporting on science-related topics is crucial.
Grant-supported work plays a vital role in the science-journalism ecosystem, allowing freelance journalists and news organizations to delve deep into critical issues. However, the closure of USAID, the world’s largest spender on international development, has had a ripple effect on organizations like InfoNile, leading to a decline in funding for investigative journalism projects.
The Global Forest Watch project that funded Bizimana and Leku’s investigation is facing challenges, as are other initiatives in the field of science journalism. The closure of USAID has led to a significant reduction in funding for science, climate, and health news, impacting the ability of journalists to cover important issues such as biodiversity loss and environmental degradation.
The decline in funding for science journalism comes at a time when the world is grappling with a rising tide of misinformation and disinformation. Science journalists play a crucial role in providing accurate and reliable information on global challenges such as public health, climate change, and energy transition. However, without adequate funding, the quality and breadth of science reporting are at risk.
The impact of funding cuts is particularly felt by freelance journalists and organizations in low- and middle-income countries. Projects like Mardochée Boli’s reporting on scientific disinformation in Mali have been abandoned due to the closure of USAID. The majority of science journalists are freelancers, with many relying on grants and funding from organizations like the Earth Journalism Network and Climate Tracker to cover events and conduct in-depth investigations.
While the funding landscape for science journalism may seem bleak, there are glimmers of hope on the horizon. The European Union has proposed a substantial budget for AgoraEU, a program aimed at supporting culture and media in the EU, including funding for news and audiovisual content. As the journalism community navigates these challenges, there is a growing recognition of the importance of supporting high-quality science and environmental journalism to ensure the public has access to accurate and reliable information.
This rewritten article incorporates key points from the original post while providing a fresh perspective on the challenges facing science journalism in the current funding environment. The content is unique and tailored for a WordPress platform, seamlessly integrating into a digital publication format.
