In October 2001, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft asked the publishers of scientific journals to avoid releasing “sensitive” information—a loosely-defined category of unclassified information that, by the standards of the PATRIOT Act, could be applied toward subversive ends.

But the Harvard report upholds a 2000 University policy that forbids researchers from accepting funding for work that cannot eventually be published.

The constellation of national-security regulations established after Sept. 11 also restricts participation in sensitive projects by researchers of certain ethnic backgrounds. While the report accepts these regulations, it emphasizes that all staff researchers should pursue research if they are legally able to do so.

According to the report’s provisions, however, scientists must be made aware of potential threats to their academic freedom before beginning work on sensitive projects.

To date, these warnings have not induced any major changes in the number of potentially sensitive projects undertaken, according to Bloom.

The report echoes a statement prepared by a committee at MIT during the 2002-2003 academic year. But while MIT’s statement of research policy concerned technically classified research, Harvard pursues no such projects.

The committee first presented the report to Hyman and University President Lawrence H. Summers for review last June. Deans of the FAS, SPH and Medical School first received a copy of the report late in October.

—Staff writer Joshua D. Gottlieb can be reached at jdgottl@fas.harvard.edu.

—Staff writer Nathan J. Heller can be reached at heller@fas.harvard.edu.