Geopolitical tension and international knowledge collaboration

This report is a translation of a report published by the Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills (HK-dir) in 2024 (Norwegian title: Geopolitisk spenning og internasjonalt kunnskapssamarbeid: En kvalitativ studie av erfaringer i norske fagmiljø).

Background

The world has become more turbulent and conflict-ridden, with rising tension between global powers and war in Europe. The Official Norwegian Report by ‘Forsvarskommisjonen’ (The Defense Commission) (NOU 2023: 14), identifies Russia and China as the main challenges facing Norway. Democracies are under pressure in several countries, and the threat landscape is complex. Numerous sectors, including the knowledge sector, which is distinctly international, are affected. For years, national threat assessments have pointed to this sector as a target for foreign intelligence and interference. Academic freedom may also come under pressure due to a more tense global environment and partnerships in authoritarian states.

Simultaneously, countries outside the Western world have emerged as scientific and technological powers. Measured by the number of academic articles in the Web of Science, China is now the world’s largest research nation (Sivertsen, 2024). As a small country with a limited share of global knowledge production, Norway depends on being connected to international knowledge development. Collaboration with partners in authoritarian regimes can be academically valuable but also presents security policy challenges. Norwegian authorities emphasize that collaboration must occur within frameworks that uphold academic values and institutional and national security requirements.

About the study

This study explores how various academic fields are impacted by a more tense geopolitical climate and how academic staff in particularly affected fields experience the act of balancing academic freedom with security requirements. National and international discussions have largely focused on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) – fields of strategic importance for states' economic and military capacities. This study also investigates how humanities and social sciences are affected by these developments.

The study is based on 43 in-depth qualitative interviews, mainly with academic staff working in areas that Norwegian authorities define as “sensitive” and/or have partnerships in countries in conflict or countries with which Norway has no security policy cooperation. The study’s objective is to shed light on specific challenges and dilemmas in the informants’ work environments.

Main findings

The challenges reported by our informants vary between fields and countries. In STEM, the challenges are primarily linked to a few countries, mainly China. Few informants report security-related or research ethics issues, though awareness is high that surveillance and espionage may occur. The most challenging aspect of their work is managing export control and licensing requirements for dual-use goods and technologies. In a sector where international interaction and knowledge exchange are central, control over knowledge and technology transfer can restrict academic freedom and create practical challenges in their work. Many find export control regulations difficult to understand and implement. As a result, some collaborations cease, and candidates from countries like China are excluded from positions for practical reasons. The lengthy processing times for licenses and entry permits are incompatible with project timelines. Reduced collaboration and fewer recruits are seen as academic losses.

Informants in the humanities and social sciences report that the space for academic work has narrowed due to political developments in several countries. Many informants face dilemmas related to research ethics as well as security – both their own security and that of their partners abroad. The backdrop is politically sensitive topics that authoritarian states may seek to censor. Informants mention that they adapt research and teaching practices to ensure their own and their partners' safety. While these adaptations are undesirable, they generally feel that they can justify these adjustments methodologically and ethically. A degree of self-censorship or adjustment of communication is not uncommon, even in Norwegian public discourse. Embassies monitor research, teaching and their communication efforts, and the risk of visa denial has a chilling effect. Some researchers working on conflicts directly affecting Norway also carefully consider how and if they participate in public debates, as doing so can have a high professional and personal cost in a polarized public sphere. Some informants express concern that fewer students will choose specific languages or area studies if the perception of threats and challenges becomes too dominant. This could negatively impact Norway’s long-term knowledge preparedness regarding these countries.

Recommendations

The following points summarize the report’s recommendations for the sector and authorities:

• Decisions should be made as close as possible to the affected academic communities. One solution does not fit all. Partnerships should be evaluated case by case and regularly reassessed.
• Academic staff, as experts in their fields, must balance security risks with academic values. They must make decisions but should not stand alone in doing so: Strong support from administration and leadership is crucial.
• Institutions should examine the support needs of staff in the humanities and social sciences.
• The issues the knowledge sector must address are complex and require cross-disciplinary and cross-sector collaboration and information sharing.
• Norwegian institutions should cooperate and share knowledge and resources. They should also leverage their networks and partners in allied countries to exchange knowledge and experiences.
• The responsibility for achieving a balanced approach between security and openness in international knowledge collaboration primarily rests with research and higher education institutions. Authorities must provide information and predictable frameworks, necessitating collaboration across relevant government bodies.
• It is essential to closely follow developments and experiences in the EU and other European countries, as they face similar challenges as Norway. European partnerships in research and education may become increasingly important in the years to come.