Research collaboration is one of the key markers of success for a university, particularly with international partners. It’s an opportunity for institutions to widen the scope of their influence, enhance innovation and prove that they are important players on the global stage. However, in an uncertain political climate, universities must take steps to consider how to keep sensitive research secure from potentially hostile foreign states, while still ensuring that researchers have the freedom to work with other academics across the world.
In April, a consultation led by former UK Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden was announced to protect universities from national security threats posed by foreign states. The initiative followed warnings from MI5 and the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) about foreign states targeting UK universities to advance their authoritarian, military and commercial goals, particularly through acquiring cutting-edge technology.
During a security briefing with Vice Chancellors from 24 leading UK universities (the Russell Group), Dowden emphasised the need to balance openness and security. The consultation focused on protecting sensitive research with potential dual civilian and military uses and preventing dependency on foreign investment.
Dr Andrew Walsh, Executive Director of Research & Business Engagement at the UK’s University of Manchester, was keen to emphasise to QS Insights Magazine the importance of government guidance in research security: “The government has an incredibly important role to play in helping keep research secure through advice [including advisory bodies such as RCAT and NPSA] and policies like export controls and ATAS. We all have our part to play in protecting research security, while enabling academic freedom within the law.”
Tobin Smith, Senior Vice President for Government Relations and Public Policy at AAU is at the forefront of matters relating to international research collaboration, plus regulatory and compliance issues. “Universities take ensuring the security and integrity of the research they conduct on behalf of the federal government very seriously. They are already taking important steps to ensure research security, including implementing new and enhanced foreign visitor policies to better monitor, and in some instances restrict, visitors (including international visitors) to specific laboratories on university campuses,” he says.
“Additionally, universities are reviewing international collaborations, contracts, and foreign gifts to assess potential risks involved in such engagements; in some instances, they choose not to enter into such agreements because of research security risks.”
Certain areas of research are under the microscope more than others when it comes to their potential to be used against a country’s national security interests, particularly those with military or scientific applications. However, it isn’t only academics in specific fields who need to follow government guidelines.
Dr Walsh explains how the University of Manchester advises researchers in all faculty areas to consider how their work may be used: “Research may be applied in different ways that weren’t intended by the researcher, so we encourage all staff to think about the risks of ‘dual use’ and make sure they comply with the relevant legislation. We also keep aware of the particular risks involved in emerging technologies.”
Smith echoes Dr Walsh, with the AAU considering not only the focus of the research, but the potential usage: “While there is often a great deal of focus and concern of theft and academic integrity surrounding certain ‘sensitive’ areas of research and critical and emerging technologies [for example, AI, quantum computing, biotechnology], perhaps more important is assessing the nature and technical readiness level (TRL) of the research involved. It is important to keep fundamental research for which an application is still unclear open if science is to advance, even in these areas of research.
“It is also important that we not overlook the need to protect the integrity and the security of certain data on all research projects, even fundamental research like pre-publication data/information and certain intellectual property like grant proposals under review by US federal agencies.”
Unfortunately, there are concerns of overreach by governments in protecting research could lead to a decline in global collaboration and reduce the value of research. International research collaboration is beneficial for several reasons, such as diversity of perspectives, sharing of resources, talent mobility, and perhaps most importantly, tackling challenges such as climate change, pandemics and food security, which are global and require coordinated international efforts.
Professor Milligan is a keen proponent of international collaboration, saying: “While geopolitical realities do influence the international partnerships that the University of Waterloo enters into, and institutional collaborations are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, we remain convinced that international collaboration is necessary to tackle the profound international challenges that face our world today, from climate change to international governance.
“We have been working closely with partners in the US, in Europe and the UK, in Australia and elsewhere to work to develop shared approaches on research security.”
This is a point echoed by Dr Walsh, who describes the approach taken by the University of Manchester when considering research partners: “Research is a global endeavour of opportunities and operational challenges. We aim to continue to produce world-class research with impact which yields economic, environmental, health, social and cultural benefits across the world. We are committed to encouraging and enabling global collaborations to address major global challenges.
“We also recognise that we must navigate complexity to operate in this global environment. This includes regulations concerning potential risks to national security, and the moral and practical considerations when collaborating with partners in low-income countries or in conflict zones, for example.”
The AAU have previously warned about excessive regulation stifling international research efforts, as Smith explains: “We have opposed and been fighting against some legislatives proposals we believe would stifle the ability of our universities and greatly discourage their faculty to engaging in important international collaborations, such as the DETERRENT Act.
“We must make sure that such proposals strike the right balance between ensuring security and integrity while at the same time protecting the critical need for science to be open and scientific results to be shared. Proposals that seek to overly restrict or control research results could have a counter-productive impact on US scientific advancement, economic leadership and our national security.”
Read the article on QS Insights Magazine.