The Cost of Disharmony: Why European Research Managers Are Calling for Harmonisation in Research Security

In today’s interconnected research landscape, research managers are increasingly aware of the risks to responsible and ethical research. Yet across Europe, national responses to research security remain fragmented and inconsistent. While some nations have regulatory frameworks, others rely on softer, less centralised measures and some are yet to implement frameworks at all. This lack of harmonisation is more than a policy gap; it’s a growing risk to the integrity and competitiveness of international research.

Research managers across Europe have voiced their concerns through the Stronger Cooperation, Safer Collaboration project. Their message is clear: divergent national approaches are creating duplication, confusion, and vulnerability. Institutions are forced to navigate a patchwork of rules, often without the resources or clarity to do so effectively. The result? A system where good faith actors are discouraged, and bad faith actors are incentivised to exploit the weakest links.

One manager summed up the dilemma: “The first to act loses out.” Institutions that implement rigorous security measures risk losing collaborations or funding to those with more open rules and risk appetites. Of course, they also risk becoming a safe harbour for those looking to exploit that flexibility. This uneven playing field undermines collective efforts and erodes trust between partners.

But what does this mean for the UK?

The UK’s Strategic Crossroads

The UK finds itself in a particularly complex position. Historically aligned with the Five Eyes nations whose approaches to research security are characterised by hard regulation, national security led, and assertive due diligence. The UK has adopted a relatively stringent stance compared to many of its European counterparts. At the same time, it remains deeply embedded in European research networks, where approaches are more varied and focused on building economic security.

This dual alignment places UK research institutions in a strategic crossroads for research security, against the backdrop of a mounting financial crisis, multiple competing pressures and a strong desire to restore their position within the European funding landscape. UK institutions may be overburdened by compliance requirements that their European counterparts do not face, potentially straining the same partnerships they are seeking to rebuild. Conversely, they may be seen as a bridge that is able to translate and mediate between divergent systems in complex international collaborations.

This raises important questions about how the UK both engages with and responds to a shifting global landscape.

A Race to the Bottom?

Without harmonisation, Europe risks becoming a patchwork of opportunity for malicious actors. Hostile entities will gravitate towards jurisdictions with minimal oversight, using them as entry points into the broader research ecosystem. This not only compromises the less-regulated institution but defeats the protections set up by more vigilant partners.

For the UK, this presents a strategic dilemma. If it maintains high standards while others do not, it may lose out on collaborations, funding, or talent. Yet lowering its guard to remain competitive could undermine its own national priorities around security and integrity.

The Call for Harmonisation

The Stronger Cooperation, Safer Collaboration emphasises the strong desire from research managers across Europe for harmonisation. This is not just to reduce administrative burden, but to level the playing field and close loopholes. Research managers across Europe are calling for shared tools, training, and standards. The European Commission’s 2024 Recommendation on Research Security is a step in the right direction, but implementation is a long journey.

For member states, associated countries and third countries to Horizon Europe that have implemented national frameworks, there is an opportunity to share knowledge, tools, and lessons learned, helping to shape the European response and avoid the creation of unnecessary friction in the global research and innovation ecosystem.

Conclusion

In research, disharmony comes at a cost. If Europe wants to remain a leader in safe, responsible, world-class research, it must act together.

Research managers have already made their position clear. Now, it’s time for funders, policymakers, and institutional leaders to respond. By investing in shared tools, aligning standards, and fostering open dialogue across borders, we can build a research ecosystem that is both open and resilient.

Because in the race to secure global research, the cost of inaction is too great and the cost of disharmony is already being felt.