Amid shifting geopolitical tensions, the notion of “research security” has become an increasingly prominent concern in science policy. This paper analyzes how research security is framed and operationalized in Germany and the United States using discourse analysis and securitization theory. The findings show that growing attention to research security does not necessarily imply securitization. Instead, the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary measures—and the role of the target audience—proves crucial in understanding divergent national approaches. The analysis also points to potential cross-national implications, as tightening research security standards in major national science and higher education systems may influence patterns of international collaboration and policy diffusion.
Policy implications
- Research Security and securitization of research should not be used as synonyms. It is possible to talk about—and address—risks and threats in international research collaboration without resorting to extraordinary measures that circumvent or ignore established governance mechanisms.
- Research security policies should reflect each country's unique science and technology landscape. While international models offer useful comparisons, direct policy transfers risk misalignment with national governance structures, institutional frameworks, and research priorities.
- Policymakers aiming to support stable international research collaborations should prioritize transparency and precision in their policies. Clear and specific guidelines reduce fear among research communities, while vague or inconsistent policies create uncertainty.
- Universities, research organizations, and funding institutions should receive dedicated resources and training to navigate evolving security policies. Governments could fund legal advisory services and compliance offices that help institutions develop tailored, proportionate security measures.
- Research security policies require evidence-based implementation to balance security concerns with scientific openness. Adaptive governance frameworks can help maintain this balance. Developing an evidence base requires systematic studies on the effects of security measures, ongoing dialog with researchers, and comparative analyses of international approaches.
Photo by ThisIsEngineering