The Global Risks Forum (GRF)
International collaboration is how research on shared risks is done, and it is governed by agreements between funders, institutions and states, by export control and research security rules, and by the terms partners are able to negotiate. This page sets out how authorised international networks are built and kept open, how security and openness are balanced, and which institutions decide what can be shared, with whom and under what conditions.
GRF · Established · service level R0
International research collaboration is the joint work of researchers and institutions across borders, governed by agreements between funders, institutions and states and by research security and export control rules. Open collaboration and security due diligence must be balanced case by case, and the decisions rest with institutions and governments.
For global research networks, in GRF's situational-awareness reading, the map opens on population density, night lights and flood water with clouds now from NASA GIBS, framed on Europe; 3 further NASA layers wait in the list.
The interactive map needs JavaScript; the layer list and sources are below.
Layers 3
Hazards and exposure, for this page
Keyboard, with the map focused
Hold Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom
Latest available
NASA GIBS / EOSDIS · ASTER GDEM (METI, NASA) · Blue Marble (NASA) · © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Natural Earth
Loading the latest NASA imagery.
Drag to move. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll, pinch or the buttons to zoom; hover for the values under the pointer; reset returns to the region.
For global research networks, in GRF's situational-awareness reading, the map opens on population density, night lights and flood water with clouds now from NASA GIBS, framed on Europe; 3 further NASA layers wait in the list.Satellite and model products as NASA publishes them, each with its own date; indicators, not assessments of any place; claim ceiling INTEGRATED.
Layers and dates
The working screen behind this subject: its structure, terms and states. Names are placeholders and values illustrative.
Global research networks · Science-policy panel · Synthesis SY-13
| Reduced losses | 12 | Moderate | Benefit |
| Faster recovery | 7 | Low | Unclear |
| Equity of access | 3 | Very low | Unclear |
Authorized international collaborations. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Concerns over foreign interference, dual-use knowledge and data protection bring new screening, export control and disclosure rules. Applied broadly, they can chill legitimate cooperation and fall unevenly on researchers by nationality.
Sanctions, conflict and diplomatic shifts suspend agreements and close data flows. Networks reorganise around remaining partners, and shared monitoring of global risks loses coverage where tension is highest.
Partners with less funding, infrastructure or legal support enter agreements on weaker terms. Unless agreements build capacity, collaboration reproduces dependence, and evidence from some regions stays thin.
Visa rules, travel costs and recognition of qualifications shape who can take part. Restrictions on mobility reduce the exchange that sustains trust between research communities across borders.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Research security | Measures that protect research from misappropriation, interference and undisclosed foreign influence while keeping it open where it can be. |
| Export controls | Laws that restrict the transfer of listed goods, software and technology, including some research knowledge, to other countries or persons. |
| Science and technology cooperation agreement | A treaty-level agreement between governments that sets a framework for joint research, mobility and the handling of intellectual property. |
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| International co-authorship | percent of outputs | annual | Bibliometric records | OBSERVED |
| Science and technology cooperation agreements in force | count by partner | annual | Treaty and ministry records | OFFICIAL |
| Research security guidance and due diligence policies | presence by institution type | periodic | Government and institutional disclosures | DECLARED |
| R&D funded from abroad | percent of gross domestic expenditure on R&D | annual | R&D surveys under the Frascati Manual | OFFICIAL |
| Membership of international research infrastructures | membership by country | annual | Infrastructure governance records | OFFICIAL |
| Internationally mobile researchers | researchers by origin and destination | periodic | Surveys and affiliation changes in bibliometric records | ESTIMATED |
The topic as a computational graph: named sources feed the methods, an evidence review gates the outputs, and the decisions stay with the authorities that hold them.
Fig. 02Nodes carry their type, two metric rows and a state; connectors show what feeds what; dashed frames name the owners; the timeline is the cadence. Design of the pipeline, not a record of a run.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| UNESCO Institute for Statistics R&D data | Expenditure and personnel, including funding from abroad, for a wide range of countries | Open, CC BY-SA IGO |
| OECD Main Science and Technology Indicators | Comparable series on R&D expenditure, funding source and personnel | Open, attribution under OECD terms |
| Eurostat R&D statistics | R&D expenditure and personnel for European countries by sector and source of funds | Free reuse, attribution |
| OpenAlex | Cross-border co-authorship and affiliation networks | Open, CC0 |
| OECD Global Science Forum reports | Analysis of research security and the governance of international research infrastructures | Free to read, OECD terms |
| UNESCO Science Report | Regional chapters on cooperation, capacity and research policy | Free to read, CC BY-SA IGO |
Research Nexus prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Ministries of science and of foreign affairs | Which science cooperation agreements to sign, renew or suspend | Agreement records; collaboration patterns; dialogue on how suspension affects shared risk monitoring |
| Research security and export control authorities | How to scope screening so it addresses real risks without blanket restriction | Comparative guidance from the OECD and partner governments; reported effects on researchers |
| Research funders | How to fund international partners on fair terms | Agreement terms, evidence on capacity building, lead and partner patterns |
| Universities and research institutes | What due diligence to apply to international partnerships | Institutional guidance and dialogue records from peer institutions |
Ethics approvals, institutional agreements, data protection and export controls apply in every jurisdiction involved.
Open exchange speeds discovery, especially for global risks such as pandemics and climate change.
Governments increasingly review collaborations in sensitive areas, which can slow or restrict exchange.
Authorized collaboration has a practical toolkit, refined over decades of international science. Its instruments reduce friction but cannot remove the need for each partner to secure its own approvals.
Institutional agreements that set terms for collaboration. Limits: can take a long time to negotiate.
Analysing data where it sits, sharing only results. Limits: technically demanding and limited for some analyses.
Checking partners, funding and applicable controls. Limits: requirements vary and change.
Comparing research policies across countries, using policy science. Limits: rapid policy change.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.