Ben Moore argues that achieving research security requires collaboration from universities and government
The security of UK research and development and the threats posed by hostile actors have been issues of cross-party political concern for some time.
It is clear the UK needs a security framework that supports collaboration on global challenges such as climate change and AI, enabling it to be a leader in emerging areas of technology without putting its R&D at risk. Achieving this will remain an issue of serious political interest regardless of the outcome of the general election—and rightly so. Briefings like the one hosted by Dowden last Thursday, along with other kinds of engagement, will continue to be important in strengthening the close ties that Russell Group universities and others have built with officials and ministers working in this area.
Dangerous moment
With war in Ukraine continuing and geopolitical tensions elsewhere increasing, this is a dangerous moment for the world, and the security risks facing universities and researchers are changing faster than laws can be introduced to mitigate them. Giving academics and universities new tools to protect research is critical, which is why the government’s announcement at the briefing that it is considering measures that would boost the capability of the sector to respond quickly to new and emerging threats is so positive.
The announcement included plans for scaling up support for the Research Collaboration Advice Team (RCAT), providing security clearance to some university staff and a commitment to considering new funding for universities.
RCAT, which provides advice to universities on the national security risks linked to their international research partnerships, is a genuinely world-leading UK initiative. Scaling up the resources available to it would help it respond to increasing numbers of university inquiries at pace and to do more to help universities improve processes and policies as threats evolve.
The Russell Group has for some time called for security clearances to be extended to key personnel within universities to enable the government to share classified information safely. We have seen similar approaches taken in the US that have enabled universities to move quickly to head off new dangers. Adopting this in a UK context would be a real positive for university research security efforts and plans to consult on how this might work are welcome.
Additional resources
But the biggest potential gamechanger in the announcement is the news that the government will look at options to inject additional resources to support the work that universities already do in this area. The Russell Group manifesto, published last year, included calls for a new UK Research Security Fund modelled on a Canadian initiative that has enabled institutions to recruit new expert staff—such as open-source intelligence experts—boost cybersecurity and invest in the physical security of sensitive facilities.
Colleagues in Canada have described the fund, which will be worth CA$125 million over five years, as “transformational” in terms of its impact on their approach to research security. It has supplemented universities’ research security investments and enabled Canadian universities to continue to work with organisations from across the world in a secure manner that minimises risk to researchers and national security. This has helped research teams explore new projects and partnerships with greater confidence.
Bureaucratic burden
Alongside such capability-building initiatives, ministers will look again at requirements around transparency of funding flows, suggesting changes to the existing regulatory system are also under consideration.
It is important any new rules work alongside the comprehensive security framework already in place. Existing legislation like the National Security and Investment Act (NSIA), export control rules and the Academic Technology Approval Scheme already place significant requirements on universities and researchers. The new Foreign Influence Registration Scheme and Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) act are also likely to require universities to report on income and partnerships with organisations based in some overseas countries.
Ultimately, the UK needs a legal framework that delivers maximum security with the minimum bureaucracy necessary to help ensure it can focus on scrutinising activities that are genuinely high risk.
In a statement issued following the recent meeting, Dowden talked about the importance of openness to innovation and new ideas. He was right to do so. Ensuring the UK has a coherent framework of rules that are as simple as possible for government to administer and universities to navigate is vital in managing the delicate balancing act of supporting the openness that can drive discovery while protecting security.
Taken together, the measures that Dowden set out for consultation indicate a commitment from ministers to continuing a co-regulatory approach, which includes legal safeguards but also helps build capabilities that will enable universities to be agile and work at pace when needed to secure their research. After years when some within government have been sceptical of the ability of universities to be credible actors in this space, this is no small thing. It’s a positive indication that the work done across the sector in response to concerns has been recognised.
The trust we have built has been hard-earned and there is still more to do. Research security and protecting the UK national interest is a shared responsibility for universities and government, and continuing to work together will be essential.
Ben Moore is head of policy (International) at the Russell Group
A version of this article also appeared in Research Fortnight