Natalie B. Aviles
Connect with Natalie
About Natalie
Aviles's research focuses on administration and policymaking in the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Overarching themes in Aviles's writings include the political dynamics of NIH administration and the role expert civil servants play in policy implementation at NIH. Aviles serves policymakers, civic organizations, media, legislators, and the public.
Contributions
In the News
Publications
Argues that the U.S. political system—where a president holds significant power—makes it harder to consistently support and grow scientific research, which could weaken America’s leadership in science.
Revisits the role of scientific norms and values in supporting public trust and democratic decision-making. Argues that maintaining core principles of scientific practice remains essential for ensuring that science can effectively contribute to democratic societies, particularly amid growing political and social challenges.
Argues that pandemic decisions shouldn’t rely only on experts, but should actively include input from the public. It finds that policies are more effective and trusted when they reflect people’s real experiences, values, and everyday realities—not just scientific evidence.
Explains how the U.S. government tried to tackle cancer and why it proved so difficult to control despite major investments and scientific advances. Shows that progress depended not just on science, but on how policies, institutions, and priorities were shaped over time—often in messy and imperfect ways.
Argues that scientific innovation should be understood as shaped by its surrounding social, institutional, and environmental context—not just by ideas or breakthroughs alone. Shows that better, more responsible innovation happens when scientists pay attention to these broader conditions and adapt their work to them.
Shows how early government efforts to build cancer research and vaccine programs helped shape scientists’ ideas about what causes cancer. Finds that these policy and funding decisions played a big role in leading to the discovery that certain genes can drive cancer—not just purely independent scientific breakthroughs.
Shows how ethical research practices grew out of the day-to-day work, norms, and decision-making within teams developing the HPV vaccine. Finds that ethics weren’t just imposed by rules, but were shaped over time by how scientists, institutions, and collaborations handled real-world challenges.