As part of their response to the 2025 EC-OECD STIP survey, countries indicated the main policy debates around government support to their Public research systems (raw data included below in Annex A). The following issues were recurrently raised in national debates:
Figure 1 displays the number of policy initiatives reported by themes within the Public research system policy area. By a wide margin, the most frequent themes are Competitive research funding and Internationalisation in public research. The former includes different types of grant programmes and funding schemes allocated competitively, whereas the latter includes various types of incentives encouraging the internationalisation of domestic Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) and Public Research Institutes (PRIs) or building international linkages through researchers themselves. The third most recurring themes is Public research strategies, containing national agendas emphasising the research system. This is followed by Cross-disciplinary research, capturing initiatives that bring together experts from different fields to work on a common problem or goal. The fifth most recurring theme is Research and technology infrastructures, including support to facilities, tools and resources necessary for conducting scientific research and innovation, such as large-scale scientific equipment, specialised databases, supercomputing facilities, and demonstration plants.
As it is to be expected, the largest portion of initiatives in this policy area target public research actors (Figure 2). Higher education institutes (HEIs) and Public research institutes (PRIs) are more often directly addressed, though policies also target directly Established researchers, Postdocs and early-career researchers and PhD Students (in decreasing order). For all these public research actors, "open access" and "open science" are recurring keywords (obtained by hovering the corresponding bars in the figure with the mouse), which stresses the importance policies give to the accessibility of results obtained from publicly funded research. Private R&D labs are also targeted by policies, although relatively less so compared to their public sector counterparts. Firms are involved in about 40% of policies compared to HEIs and PRIs. Keywords suggest that many policies targeting Firms promote targeted research funding (e.g. towards artificial intelligence or climate change) and encourage science-industry linkages (e.g. via commercialisation). Knowledge intermediaries play a more significant role in the knowledge exchange and co-creation.
Figure 3 shows that Project grants for public research is the most frequently used instrument to support basic and applied research. It is closely followed by Strategies, agendas and plans, which are widely used by countries to give strategic direction to public research organisations, research infrastructures and their role in contributing to technological development, innovation and open access (see keywords). Institutional funding for public research is another frequent instrument (usually with higher budget expenditures compared to project grants), capturing block funding and performance contracts for public research organisations. In HEIs, resources are often used to jointly fund public research and teaching activities. Another recurrent instrument is Dedicated support to research and technical infrastructures, supporting the creation of new facilities, resources, and services that are used by science and industry actors. Interestingly, some grants are also directed to the private sector, i.e. Grants for business R&D and innovation in the interest of fostering science-industry cooperation and public research commercialisation (see relevant policy area).
Initiatives in this policy area that do not have any budget allocations typically include Strategies, agendas and plans, aiming to set out and articulate governments' vision for public research (Figure 4). This includes provisions for open access to research data and for research integrity (see keywords). As is the case in most policy areas, initiatives with smaller yearly budget expenditures (i.e. up to 5 M EUR) are more numerous. These include grants funding research that are directly targeted at scientists. Initiatives with larger budgets place further emphasis on institutional actors, e.g. by targeting HEIs, PRIs and research infrastructures. The 'training' keyword indicates that initiatives with the largest budgets (More than 500M EUR) often bundle R&D funding with teaching activities (this keyword is also present in Institutional funding for public research, as shown in Figure 3).
Figure 5 shows that Germany has reported the largest number of initiatives in this policy area, followed by the United States, Türkiye and Poland. The chart shows only the number of policy initiatives reported by countries and gives no indication of their scale or scope. The figure should therefore be interpreted with care. Clicking on a given bar in the chart will bring you to the corresponding country dashboard for Public research system policies.
Table 1 contains the answers provided by countries (and other entities) to the following question: Policy debates for Public research system You may use the table's search box to filter the data by country or keyword. You may also dowload the data in Excel format.
Table 1. Policy debates in the Public research system policy area
| Country | Response |
|---|---|
| Argentina | In Argentina, current policy debates on government support for the public research system are centred around several key issues: funding sustainability, institutional priorities, and the role of public research organisations in national development. The implementation of the National Law for Science, Technology, and Innovation (Law 27.614), which mandates a progressive increase of GDP investment in STI, has sparked discussions about its applicability and the prioritisation of strategic sectors of the economy. Another significant area of debate is the orientation and governance of public research agendas. The main concern here is to strengthen the alignment of public research with socio-economic challenges and productive transformation. This involves the state playing a pivotal role in facilitating links between researchers and external actors, diversifying funding sources, and improving technology transfer mechanisms. |
| Armenia | No responses have been provided in 2025. |
| Australia | In terms of the policy debates concerning government support for the public research system in Australia, several main themes are currently shaping these discussions: Ongoing policy debates around government support for Australia's public research system reflect a broad effort to strengthen its effectiveness, responsiveness, integrity, and global competitiveness. A major focus is the reform of competitive funding mechanisms, such as the Australian Research Council’s National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP), which is undergoing a redesign to better support basic and applied research, streamline administration, and enhance collaboration with industry. Simultaneously, there is growing attention to non-competitive funding models that support infrastructure, workforce development, and long-term strategic research priorities, particularly in health and medical research. These debates also encompass the need to balance support for high-risk, high-reward research with mechanisms that ensure reproducibility and integrity, as outlined in the updated National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research Other key areas of discussion include promoting open access to research data and publications, enabling cross-disciplinary collaboration, and improving third-party funding transparency. The government is also exploring how to better support digital transformation within research-performing organisations (RPOs), enhance international collaboration while safeguarding research security, and address structural changes needed to sustain the research workforce and infrastructure. The National Health and Medical Research Strategy highlights the importance of embracing emerging technologies like AI, supporting Indigenous research priorities, and translating research into policy and practice. These debates collectively aim to ensure that Australia’s public research system remains innovative, inclusive, and impactful in a rapidly evolving global landscape. |
| Austria | According to Statistics Austria's global estimate, the expenditure on research and development (R&D) in Austria is projected to reach €16.64 billion in 2024. This represents an increase of approximately 10% compared to 2023, with the research intensity expected to achieve a record level of 3.34%, surpassing the European target of 3% for the 11th consecutive year. The Federal Government's contribution to this expenditure will be €4.62 billion, accounting for 27.76% of the total. This substantial increase in R&D funding underscores the Federal Government's commitment to sustainably strengthening Austria as a hub for R&D and innovation. In 2024, the largest portion of R&D funding will once again come from a robust business enterprise sector. Domestic companies are set to contribute €7.42 billion, which represents 44.59% of the total R&D funding. After a decline in 2020, the contribution from the business sector has seen a resurgence. The research premium, as estimated by the Federal Ministry of Finance, will contribute approximately €1 billion, or 6.01% of the total R&D funding. Additionally, the largest share of R&D funding from abroad will come from foreign companies, totalling €2.59 billion or 15.54%. While R&D intensity is a crucial metric, it provides limited insight into the quality of outputs and structural changes within the sector. Consequently, Austria is keen on enhancing existing indicators, such as the European Innovation Scoreboard, to better capture new developments and challenges. This enhancement is intended to facilitate the formulation of more evidence-informed policies. The RTI Strategy 2030 is designed to support and enhance Austria’s public research system, aiming to foster an environment conducive to high-quality research and development activities. This information was provided by national sources and is not yet available in OECD databases as of July 2025. |
| Belgium - Brussels Capital | The Brussels-Capital Region (BCR) recognises the strategic importance of research and innovation not only for economic growth but also for addressing broader societal challenges. It acknowledges R&D as a critical source of solutions for unprecedented social, environmental, and economic issues. Reflecting this, regional policy priorities now extend to emerging domains such as advanced digital technologies, health, the circular economy, and social innovation. There is a strong focus on strengthening the entire research-to-innovation value chain and better supporting the scaling-up of innovative enterprises in the region. These priorities indicate a shift beyond purely market-driven objectives towards leveraging research and innovation for public value and societal impact. Efforts are ongoing to streamline administrative processes to allow faster and more flexible operations. Initiatives are also underway to make the regional innovation ecosystem more attractive for high-potential startups and scale-ups. Overall, the policy direction is moving towards a better-resourced, more agile public research system that underpins innovation for both economic and societal goals in the BCR. Another central debate focuses on improving the valorisation of research results, ensuring that knowledge generated in universities and labs is effectively translated into innovation and societal benefit. Policymakers are advancing measures to better disseminate and exploit research outputs. For example, they are reinforcing open science principles to ensure that publicly funded findings are made widely accessible. |
| Belgium - Federal government | A new strategic plan is currently being prepared for the Science Office Policy (Belspo), following the expiration of the previous plan on 31 December 2024. This plan will place particular emphasis on enhancing information security across the federal administration. In response to this priority, the Council of Ministers has allocated a total of €55,000k in 2025 to support compliance with NIS2, aimed at bolstering cybersecurity measures. Of this budget, €568,250 has been designated for Belnet and €1,312,500 for Belspo and the ESF. The funds will be utilised to strengthen existing cybersecurity solutions in three key areas. Firstly, the implementation of an Information Security Management System (ISMS), which is a framework consisting of policies for managing, monitoring, and improving an organisation's information security. Secondly, the acquisition of M365 E5 licences, which are essential for subscribing to the Security-as-a-Service 2 (SECaaS2) framework contract. This contract facilitates the provision of managed cybersecurity services to Service Public Fédéral (SPF) and other federal entities. Lastly, the financing and subscription of SECaaS2 will be covered. Looking beyond 2025, a centralised approach to cybersecurity will be proposed for the entire federal authority for the period from 2026 to 2028. This strategy will include uniform processes and architectures, the sharing of knowledge and resources, awareness campaigns, and the adoption of common technical solutions and strategies. |
| Belgium - Flanders | A key priority is ensuring an optimal balance between fundamental and applied research alongside efforts to enhance economic valorisation through initiatives such as the reform of the Flemish cluster policy and the strategic research centres. Consideration is also being given to streamlining and rationalising various funding channels to achieve greater efficiency and impact. This includes discussions on which groups of beneficiaries have access to which funding channels. The current government has committed to vetting the R&D&I system in Flanders with the aim of optimising government support to achieve maximum impact. As part of this, two spending reviews are planned within the current legislative term, focusing on the governance of Strategic Basic Research (SBO) instruments and the valorisation of publicly funded research at college universities and universities for the benefit of the Flemish economy. In Flanders, there is currently no regional strategy specifically promoting interdisciplinary research. The STI landscape primarily adopts a bottom-up approach, complemented by strategic focal points such as the Strategic Research Centres and spearhead clusters. The majority of research funding, managed by the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO), is allocated not to specific disciplines but based on scientific excellence. However, there are general incentives to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration. For instance, certain calls require researchers to collaborate with partners, and interdisciplinary research projects are assessed by a dedicated expert panel or specific discipline experts. In 2019, the Flemish government introduced a new parameter to measure the degree of interdisciplinarity in university research, allocating 2% of the resources from the Special Research Fund (BOF). However, the parameter developed by the Flemish Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM) was eventually deemed unsuitable for resource allocation. In 2023, the government shifted to a more qualitative monitoring of interdisciplinarity within Flemish universities. |
| Belgium - Wallonia | In Wallonia, current debates around the public research system are centred on aligning research more closely with societal and economic needs while preserving academic excellence and autonomy. A key discussion point is the need to modernise research governance and enhance coordination among universities, public research centres (CRIs), and government bodies. There is a tension between those advocating for a more centralised strategic steering of research, aimed at aligning with regional economic priorities and mission-driven innovation, and those who emphasise the importance of maintaining bottom-up, curiosity-driven research and institutional autonomy. This tension is particularly evident in discussions regarding the allocation of structural funding versus project-based funding, with increasing pressure to link public research support more directly to impact and performance indicators. Another significant debate focuses on the long-term sustainability and attractiveness of research careers in Wallonia. Concerns have been raised by researchers and academic institutions about the lack of stable funding paths for early-career researchers, the fragmentation of research support instruments, and administrative burdens. In response, there have been calls to strengthen investment in talent development and internationalisation. This includes establishing clearer career progression pathways, enhancing research infrastructure, and fostering more cross-border collaborations, particularly within the EU framework. These debates are reflected in recent funding schemes such as Win4Excellence (2023), which supports long-term, high-level public research, and the development of Strategic Innovation Initiatives (IIS) that integrate universities and research centres in regional missions. At the policy level, there is an increasing focus on fostering interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research that addresses societal challenges, including those linked to the green and digital transitions. Discussions are underway on how to reshape the incentive structures within the public research system to better reward collaboration across sectors and disciplines, and to integrate citizen engagement where relevant. These debates indicate an emerging vision in which the Walloon public research system plays a proactive role in regional transformation, while remaining scientifically robust and internationally connected. |
| Belgium - Wallonia-Brussels Federation | Discussions about scientific research funding are central to public research debates, particularly in the context of French-speaking Belgium. The debate encompasses the role of project-based funding and the significance of European funding. Attracting maximum funding is a key focus, reflecting the competitive nature of securing financial resources for research initiatives. Another critical aspect of the debate is the precariousness of research careers and their attractiveness, especially to profiles highly sought after by the private sector. This issue is compounded by the taxation policies affecting research funding. Taxation, which remains a federal responsibility, directly impacts the financial viability of research careers. Recent discussions have challenged exemptions from certain social security contributions, which are pivotal in defining what constitutes research for funding purposes. The promotion of open access publications and the associated costs, known as Article Processing Charges (APCs), which are often borne by universities, are also prominent in the discourse. The FWB is actively monitoring its 2018 decree to enhance support for open access diamond journals, aiming to alleviate financial burdens on academic institutions. Moreover, the security of knowledge has emerged as a significant concern. The FWB is exploring strategies to secure the knowledge produced within the country. These strategies must balance the imperative of academic freedom with the demands of open science, ensuring that research outputs are both safe and accessible. |
| Brazil | The primary ongoing policy debates surrounding Brazil's governmental support for the public research system revolve around two main themes: links with the private sector and priority-setting. Links with the Private Sector: The Brazilian public research system should be further connected with the private sector, particularly to better address the latter’s needs and opportunities. The number of interactions, collaborations, and partnerships between the public research system and the private sector should be increased. This integration could be fostered throughout the governance and operation of the public research system. Following the reform of the Innovation Law (Law No. 13 243, 11 January 2016), new regulations introduced additional initiatives, such as strategic alliances and partnership agreements, to enhance connections between public research institutions and the private sector. Priority-setting: This debate primarily concerns how the public research budget should be allocated among scientific areas and industries to enable Brazil to maximise the economic and social returns on STI investments. One possible approach is to adopt mission-oriented principles for innovation policy. To augment the value-added content of key production chains, the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MCTI) has launched the Applied Technology Centres (ATCs). These centres are designed to function as hubs for national laboratories and research institutions. The inaugural ATCs focus on artificial intelligence and advanced materials, including niobium, rare earth minerals, graphene, and other carbon-based nano-materials. ATC labs supplement the existing lab network and engage public research institutions and companies in both setting R&D targets and sharing costs. Another critical debate relates to the coordination of instruments and institutions funding STI, especially considering the varying levels of technological readiness, to prevent funding gaps throughout the project cycles. |
| Bulgaria | The main ongoing policy debates around government support for the public research system in Bulgaria focus on the adequacy, structure, and effectiveness of public funding, as well as the institutional framework for research and innovation governance. A central issue is the persistent underfunding of public research institutions and universities. Stakeholders, including academic associations, research centres, and some political actors, are calling for a significant increase in the share of GDP allocated to R&D. Another key area of debate concerns the direction and coordination of research policy. There are growing discussions about the need to better align public research with national strategic priorities and the needs of the economy and society. This includes areas such as digital transformation, green innovation, and regional development. Some stakeholders advocate for strengthening the role of the Bulgarian National Science Fund (BNSF) and enhancing coordination between ministries. Others highlight the importance of institutional autonomy and more bottom-up, researcher-driven initiatives. Emerging visions include shifts towards more mission-oriented and interdisciplinary research, alongside stronger integration into European and international research ecosystems. These debates reflect broader tensions between centralisation and decentralisation, strategic steering and academic freedom, as well as short-term economic goals and long-term knowledge creation. At the beginning of March 2025, a Regulation on the Procedure for Publishing in the Bulgarian Open Science Portal was approved, setting clear rules for the publication and storage of scientific data and research results funded by public resources. This regulation ensures easier access and greater transparency for beneficiaries of publicly funded scientific projects. The public consultation on the updated Regulation on the Conditions and Procedure for Maintaining the Register of Research Activities in the Republic of Bulgaria has also been completed. Once approved by the Minister of Education and Science, it will enhance the quality of scientific research and the management of research activities through a unified, centralised information system that integrates national information resources and enables various analyses and references. |
| Canada | In recent years, the Government of Canada (GoC) has balanced investments in fundamental research with targeted investments that address current priorities, challenges, and opportunities. Several areas of debate surround government support for the public research system, including reducing the administrative burden related to research funding, open and collaborative science, and increasing financial support for the Canadian research ecosystem. In Budget 2024, the GoC announced an increase in core research grant funding and support for Canadian researchers, including CAD $1.8 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, with CAD $748.3 million per year ongoing to Canada’s federal granting agencies: the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), and the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR). To tackle the global challenges of our time, the government is enhancing support and expanding investments to ensure the country remains a leader in science and research. In 2025, the GoC launched the Canada Research Training Awards Suite, which will consolidate 11 existing scholarship and fellowship programs at the three federal granting agencies into a single suite of programs. This consolidation aims to reduce the administrative burden on researchers while fostering better collaboration and coordination across federal granting agencies. Additionally, the three federal granting agencies have made significant strides in enhancing coordination, expanding and strengthening their collaboration, and building their capacity to implement innovative, harmonized policies and programs that leverage the unique strengths of each organization. They have enhanced international coordination and engagement, driving collaborative initiatives across artificial intelligence, quantum, and Arctic research. The New Frontiers in Research Fund supports interdisciplinary research tackling global challenges, with over 800 Canadian-led projects and 783 team members from 58 countries. The agencies require any peer-reviewed publications arising from agency-supported research to be openly accessible immediately, ensuring wider reach and equity in research dissemination. They have also strengthened research partnerships to maximize social, health, and economic benefits for Canadians, including the Lab to Market grants for entrepreneurship and commercialization. Work is also underway to implement a new, modern, and user-friendly application portal for researchers and students to apply for funding opportunities. The tri-agency grants management solution will replace over a dozen outdated and complex application systems, streamlining them into one digital platform that will be used across the granting agencies. The new program and the portal are part of Canada’s ambitious plan to strengthen and modernize the federal research support system. In 2023, the external Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System identified areas for improvement, such as better support for talent development, coordination of mission-oriented research funding, a cohesive approach to infrastructure funding, and stronger connections between research and innovation. Simplification and harmonization of support for talent and the promotion of an inclusive research environment were also emphasized, including support for Indigenous and Francophone research and talent. Several key aspects of the funding of the research system, particularly major research facilities and digital research infrastructure (DRI), remain a current area of debate. This includes balancing investments in new research infrastructure with other research funding needs, maintenance of existing infrastructure, as well as access costs for research infrastructure located outside of Canada. Further debates centre on prioritizing large-scale national projects versus smaller, institution-specific needs, ensuring equitable access across regions, and aligning investments with both innovation goals and economic security priorities. Research infrastructure in Canada is primarily funded through a mix of federal and arms-length programs, such as grants provided by the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and the federal granting councils, alongside provincial government contributions, institutional funds from universities, and occasionally industry partnerships. The roles and responsibilities of national and sub-national levels of government (provincial and territorial) continue to be discussed, including on topics of initial investment and ongoing maintenance costs. |
| Chile | One of the most vibrant policy debates is centred on achieving gender parity in the allocation of scholarships for specialisation in scientific careers. This issue is currently being discussed in the Chilean Congress. Other ongoing debate questions are whether the overall research expenditures in the country are sufficiently funded. The government primarily funds individual projects, which often lack provisions for the long-term support of critical research infrastructure, such as university laboratories and administrative operations. Furthermore, the Better Work in Research Agenda is an initiative that seeks to monitor research careers or trajectories and the conditions surrounding them, complementing the efforts to fund research infrastructure adequately. Additionally, legislative attention is directed towards a Technology Transfer Bill and an Artificial Intelligence Bill, both under review by the National Congress. These bills are crucial as they will further define the legal and operational framework for technology transfer and AI development in Chile and stimulate the creation and development of science and technology-based companies (“EBCT”) from higher education institutions. |
| China | In recent years, the Chinese government has recognised the importance of strengthening the public research system and enhancing research capabilities as crucial elements of its science and technology management strategy. This focus is driven by several factors: the need to meet national requirements necessitates improvements in the existing management models of science and technology programmes and the development of new organisational structures for research; the imperative to promote economic and social development demands continuous enhancement of the innovation capabilities of research entities; the shift in research paradigms calls for the reform of basic research organisation; and the necessity to address fiscal pressures on the government requires reforms in the utilisation of fiscal research funds to boost efficiency. To enhance the public research system, the Chinese government has implemented various measures. These include increasing R&D investment, particularly in basic research, innovating the organisational modes of major scientific and technological projects, enhancing collaboration among research entities, and strengthening the construction of major scientific and technological infrastructure. |
| Costa Rica | In Costa Rica, the ongoing policy debates concerning government support for the public research system focus on enhancing coordination, performance, and societal relevance within the current model. This is particularly challenging given the limited public investment in R&D, which stood at 0.34% of GDP in 2023. A key aspect is the autonomy of public universities—key recipients of research funding—and the push for more results-oriented public investment that aligns with national priorities. Policymakers, along with international organizations such as the OECD, have recommended the introduction of external evaluation mechanisms and competitive funding models that emphasize performance and collaboration with the private sector. MICITT is working on a first draft, which will be completed by the end of the year. It plans to involve public universities and research centers. Another significant debate revolves around the fragmentation of funding mechanisms and the low integration between the research system and national innovation goals stablished in the STI National Plan. Stakeholders are considering whether to consolidate public research and innovation funds under a unified framework led by the Ministry of Science, Innovation, Technology, and Telecommunications (MICITT). This consolidation aims to increase efficiency, transparency, and strategic alignment. Emerging visions highlight the need to better connect research outputs with societal needs—such as sustainability, digital transformation, and health—through mission-oriented funding, co-investment schemes, and technology transfer incentives. Current policy debates in Costa Rica are shaping efforts to improve coordination, governance, and alignment in the STI system, with a growing focus on strengthening institutional frameworks and linking research funding to national priorities. |
| Croatia | In Croatia, there are 25 public research institutes and 117 higher education institutions. According to Eurostat, Croatia's R&D intensity in 2023 was 1.39% (preliminary data), with a national goal of reaching 2.5% by 2025. Although this target may be achieved slightly later, the continuous growth in R&D expenditure as a share of GDP since 2017—rising from 0.85% in 2017 to 1.43% in 2022—indicates a positive trend that should bolster the economy's growth and competitiveness in the medium and long term. As part of the Croatian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) for 2021-2026, three key reforms have been implemented to enhance the public research system. The first reform (R1) focuses on performance-based funding, designed to foster research excellence through a meritocratic and transparent fund distribution. This approach involves setting institutional goals and monitoring their achievement every two years using measurable indicators. As of July 2023, the Regulation on program financing of public higher education institutions and public scientific institutes in the Republic of Croatia has been enacted, leading to 25 research institutes and 2 polytechnics signing performance-based agreements with the Ministry of Science, Education, and Youth. Negotiations with universities are currently ongoing. The other two reforms under the NRRP include R2, which develops an incentive model for advancing researchers' careers and stimulating scientific research in STEM and ICT fields, and R3, which aims to improve the efficiency of public investments through a more functional program framework for financing Research, Development, and Innovation (RDI). The RRF has played a pivotal role in addressing legislative gaps and advancing essential reforms within the Croatian public research system. A comprehensive legislative framework has been established, facilitating the modernization of the system and addressing funding gaps through targeted programs. Building on these successes, the Ministry of Science, Education and Youth plans to continue and expand these outcomes through the PCC 2021-2027 (ERDF) and future financial periods. The PCC interventions aim to maintain the momentum from the RRF reforms, address any remaining gaps, and introduce new initiatives to further enhance the Croatian R&I ecosystem. As mentioned before, the funding model for public research and higher education has also been reviewed, as one of three key reforms that are in progress. As of 2023, all 25 public research institutes, along with two polytechnic universities, have signed program-based funding agreements. This new model promotes strategic planning and result-based funding allocation, offering institutions the flexibility to set their objectives and indicators. This approach not only aligns public investments with national priorities but also enhances accountability, quality, and institutional development. It further aims to improve research quality, foster innovation, and ensure that outputs meet industry needs. Croatia's commitment to inclusiveness and equal opportunities in research is also evident. The country actively participates in the European Research Area activities that promote gender equality and has endorsed the Ljubljana Declaration on Gender Equality in 2021. Furthermore, Croatia is involved in the GENDERACTIONplus project, which aims to coordinate gender equality and inclusiveness objectives. The National Plan for Gender Equality and the Action Plan, both adopted in March 2023, are testament to Croatia's dedication to these principles. Additionally, the Croatian Research Information System (CroRIS) is now functional. CroRIS serves as a central location that provides comprehensive, complete, and reliable information on all elements of the science system in the Republic of Croatia and represents the basis for decision-making related to science and research. Moreover, the Ministry has developed a series of complementary activities through the Digital, Innovation, and Green Technology Project (DIGIT Project), funded by a World Bank loan and running until 2028. This project supports comprehensive structural reforms in the research and innovation sector by financing interventions that aim to transform research excellence, increase productivity, and achieve a green, digital, and globally competitive economy. These efforts are aligned with the Smart Specialization Strategy, which was adopted by the government in late 2023 and identifies seven thematic priority areas for RDI investment: Personalized Health, Smart and Clean Energy, Smart and Green Transport, Security - Awareness, Prevention, Response, and Remediation, Sustainable and Circular Food, Customized and Integrated Wood Products, Digital Products, and Platforms. |
| Cyprus | The National Strategy for Research and Innovation 2024-2026 is designed to create a framework that optimizes the use of state investments and the outcomes of research and innovation (R&I). This strategy aims to foster excellence and promote innovation throughout the ecosystem, while also encouraging startup entrepreneurship and outward-looking activities. There have been ongoing discussions about the allocation and effectiveness of government funding, with the goal of maximizing its socio-economic impact and ensuring a balanced and sustainable research ecosystem. This includes finding the optimal balance between funding fundamental research, which advances basic scientific knowledge, and applied research, which addresses practical challenges directly. Achieving the right balance between these two types of research is crucial for maintaining Cyprus’s competitiveness and ensuring that fundamental scientific advancements are not overlooked. Additionally, there is an emphasis on improving access to research infrastructures and enhancing the quality and accessibility of research facilities for both academic institutions and industry. |
| Czechia | In 2023, the Czech Republic allocated CZK 139.7 billion to research and development, which represented 1.83% of its GDP. There is an ongoing discussion advocating for an increase in public R&D spending to reach a target of 3% of GDP. Notably, the largest portion of R&D funding, amounting to almost CZK 88 billion, came from corporate sources, which constituted over 60% of the total R&D expenditure. Public domestic sources contributed CZK 41.8 billion, while public foreign sources, primarily EU subsidies, provided CZK 8.3 billion. The Czech Republic is also enhancing its legislative framework to support the science and research sector more effectively. The Research, Development, Innovation, and Knowledge Transfer Act has been introduced to the legislative process, aiming to reduce administrative burdens, enforce ethical standards, protect national security interests, and promote the career development of scientists. This is part of a broader initiative under the RRP, specifically component 5.3 - Strategically Managed and Internationally Competitive Research, Development, and Innovation Ecosystem, which seeks to boost the socio-economic impacts of research by promoting excellence, enhancing international cooperation, and strategically developing human capital. In preparation for the EU's 10th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10), set to launch in 2028, the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports has drafted a national position. This strategic document, developed in collaboration with key stakeholders from the state administration, research support providers, research organisations, and academia, considers the immediate and long-term needs and priorities of the Czech research and innovation ecosystem. |
| Denmark | The Danish Parliament and society have long recognised the importance of a robust public research system. For many years, Denmark has maintained a stable level of public involvement in research and development (R&D). In 2023, government-performed R&D expenditure (GOVERD) accounted for 0.09% of the country’s GDP. This commitment aligns with the target set in the EU Barcelona Declaration, with both the government and the parliament pledging to maintain at least 1% of GDP annually towards R&D. When a new government assumed power in June 2019, discussions emerged about how the public research system could adapt to support mission-oriented research at the national level, particularly with a focus on climate change mitigation. The current government, which took office in December 2022, has upheld this mission-oriented and strategic approach to research investment. Additionally, there has been an increased focus on critical and digital technologies, such as AI, quantum technologies, and biotechnologies, alongside research security in Denmark. In recent years, there has also been a significant growth in funding from Danish private foundations for research, especially in fields such as medicine, health, and natural sciences. This increase presents excellent opportunities for conducting high-quality research but also introduces new strategic choices for universities and society at large. Consequently, a debate has emerged regarding how to optimise the balance between public and private funding for research at universities and other research institutions. Furthermore, there has been ongoing discussion about the balance between the allocation of basic research funding and competitive funding. As part of the yearly negotiation on the Danish Research Reserve in 2024, the Danish Parliament increased the basic research funding for Danish universities in 2025. This decision reflects a continued effort to support foundational research amidst evolving funding landscapes. |
| Egypt | In Egypt, current discussions revolve around government support for the public scientific research system as part of the state's efforts to enhance the status of research as a key tool for achieving sustainable development goals and Egypt Vision 2030. These discussions focus on how to increase the efficiency of scientific research funding and direct it toward national priorities, such as food security, health, energy, water, and education. A key issue is the balance between funding basic and applied research. Some stakeholders believe it is necessary to focus on research related to innovation and economic development, while others emphasize the importance of supporting basic research to ensure the long-term sustainability of knowledge production. Discussions also focus on the need to develop research infrastructure and enhance the capabilities of researchers in public institutions by investing in advanced laboratories, providing training opportunities, and increasing scientific exchange with international institutions. There is a growing trend to support the establishment of research centers of excellence within Egyptian universities, linking them to national priorities such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology. Many stakeholders are also calling for increased funding for interdisciplinary research that offers innovative solutions to societal challenges. These dialogues reflect a growing awareness of the importance of empowering the public research system and transforming it into a true lever for knowledge production and national development. |
| Estonia | In 2025, debates around government support for Estonia’s public research system are strongly influenced by the changed security and economic environment. Budget cuts resulting from fiscal consolidation have affected the previously agreed pace of higher education funding increases. Although state funding for higher education continues to grow even during austerity years, the rate of increase is lower than originally planned. Funding necessary to complete the ongoing doctoral education reform has been secured, ensuring the implementation of measures that reposition PhD students as junior researchers with salaried positions. The core funding instruments for research have been preserved at existing levels, but several smaller schemes have been reduced or consolidated in order to adapt to tighter fiscal constraints, sparking discussions on prioritisation and long-term sustainability. There are ongoing concerns about the fragmented and project-based nature of research funding. Although new instruments and increasing international funding have expanded opportunities, they have also introduced higher co-financing requirements and administrative burdens, which limit research continuity and flexibility. A particular point of contention within the academic community is the allocation of research funds through various line ministries. While this approach aims to align research with societal needs, it has led to a proliferation of funding sources with differing criteria and procedures, exacerbating fragmentation and reducing transparency. There is a growing recognition that the current system requires a comprehensive review to ensure that STI governance remains responsive to societal and economic needs in a changing environment. Steps are being taken at the government level to improve the visibility and coherence of publicly funded, demand-driven research. From 2025 onwards, ministries are required to publish four-year R&D action plans as part of their annual budget submissions to the national budget strategy. This is intended to enhance long-term planning, clarify knowledge needs, and strengthen accountability, while addressing concerns over fragmentation and bureaucracy in the current model. Parallel to these developments, the societal and economic impact of high-level research remains an ongoing concern. While expectations for the contribution of research and development to address complex societal challenges continue to rise, the transformation required—both in institutional work culture and in the broader economic structure—cannot happen overnight. Nevertheless, 2024 and 2025 have seen the launch of several national support measures aimed at strengthening the knowledge transfer capacities of public research institutions. These include funding schemes for applied research, intersectoral researcher mobility, and the enforcement of knowledge transfer support structures. As a result, awareness of the need to embed knowledge transfer more systematically into the missions and performance frameworks of research institutions is growing. |
| European Union | The most pressing policy debate in the public research sector concerns the balance between supporting research based on predetermined top-down priorities, such as close-to-market and applied research evaluated based on impact, and bottom-up basic research evaluated based on excellence. This debate extends to the balance between project-based competitive research funding and institutional or block funding. A key issue within this debate is whether evaluation and allocation mechanisms, particularly bibliometrics and peer review, are fair. Top-down approaches prioritise specific technologies or research addressing societal challenges and align with societal needs. Advocates of this approach argue that public research should focus on solving real-world problems and be measured by its societal impact. Conversely, the bottom-up basic science approach emphasises curiosity-driven research that advances our understanding of the natural world, providing a foundation for innovation. Proponents believe that basic scientific research leads to scientific breakthroughs, often arising from unexpected discoveries, and lays the groundwork for applied research and innovation. An emerging and dynamic policy debate within the public research system is the strategic uptake and use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in science. It is essential not only to develop new AI tools but also to ensure their responsible and widespread use across disciplines to accelerate discovery, foster interdisciplinarity, and enhance research efficiency and productivity. Key enablers for maximising the impact of AI include AI-specific fellowships, support for institutional AI strategies, and access to compute infrastructure, such as the upcoming AI (Giga)Factories, and high-quality datasets. The establishment and interconnection of networks of excellence and the development of co-financing mechanisms with industry are crucial to foster innovation and avoid duplication of efforts. The full potential of AI in science also demands a strong focus on talent attraction and retention, skills development, research culture, incentives, and governance. These factors will shape the contribution of AI to excellent and ethical science in Europe. In response, the European Commission is preparing a dedicated EU Strategy for AI in Science. To further advance the ERA objectives as defined in the Pact for R&I, the Council – based on a proposal by the Commission – adopted a Recommendation on the ERA Policy Agenda 2025–2027 on 23 May 2025. This incorporates eleven “structural policies” outlining long-term undertakings embedded in national and European policy, such as open science, research infrastructures, and research careers. It also includes eight “ERA actions” addressing specific gaps on new or emerging issues, such as artificial intelligence in science. These have time-bound objectives or pilot specific initiatives, such as research security. The Mission Letter of the Commissioner for Start-ups, Research and Innovation, Ekaterina Zaharieva, asks the Commissioner to propose a European Research Area Act to guarantee a “fifth freedom”, namely the free movement of researchers, scientific knowledge, and technology. The aim is to reduce fragmentation of research and to anchor innovation and research more firmly within the Single Market, thereby unlocking more of its potential – as also proposed in the report “Much more than a market” (the so-called Letta Report) in April 2024. The Competitiveness Compass (January 2025) similarly outlines that the EU must “revive” the innovation cycle if it is to remain competitive, striving for better coordination and reinforced alignment of public R&I efforts across Member States. |
| Finland | One of the central debates in Finland's STI governance concerns the implementation of the long-term target to raise R&D investment to 4% of GDP by 2030. This objective, supported by a cross-party consensus, led to the 2024 Act on Government Research and Development Funding, which mandates significant annual increases in government R&D spending until 2030, expecting complementary investment from the private sector. The government R&D funding is distributed to public research performing organisations like higher education institutions, government research institutions, and wellbeing services counties through basic funding, which is allocated via their administrative branches. Competitive R&D funding is mainly allocated by Business Finland and the Research Council of Finland. In 2024, Business Finland granted €611 million in RDI-related support, the Research Council of Finland €488 million, and the Strategic Research Council €55 million to research. The largest share of the government funding increases available for public research organisations has been directed to competitive funding. Allocations have prioritised cooperation of R&D actors, competitive and direct funding to research and innovation infrastructures, and doctoral education in universities and post-doctoral education in public research institutions. The additional funding has mainly been directed to existing instruments with an increasing emphasis on projects that foster collaboration between companies, higher education institutions, and research institutes. The research and development funding organisations have also introduced new funding instruments and criteria to implement the priorities set out in the government's multiannual plan. These include, inter alia, further widening competitive R&D funding to actors like university hospitals and wellbeing service counties, as well as for universities of applied sciences. Business Finland and the Research Council of Finland continue to act as key facilitators of cross-sectoral collaboration. In recent years, coordination between funders has been enhanced to support synergies, avoid fragmentation, and ensure smoother knowledge flows across organisational boundaries. With the increasing R&D funding, a challenge emerges with the adequate personnel resourcing at Business Finland and the Research Council of Finland. A current debate also includes discussions on the shifting balance between competitive and basic funding, affecting the possibilities of public research organisations to increase their R&D capabilities and to engage in cooperation with private entities, as well as on the availability of R&D experts for the increasing needs. At the same time as public spending on R&D is increasing, cuts in public spending have been made in almost all sectors, except in security and defence, ranging from healthcare to education and innovation funding – some affecting also RDI actors and activities. |
| France | The French public research system is characterised by the involvement of multiple stakeholders, including the government, private sector, and citizens. Research producing organisations (RPOs) in France are categorised as either governmental, such as public bodies or state-owned entities, or private, which includes non-governmental organisations, civil societies, foundations, associations, and commercial entities. Governmental RPOs primarily receive support through public funds allocated annually as stipulated by the applicable Finance Law, which covers their operating costs. Each RPO under the Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation (MESR) periodically enters into a four-year "Contrat d'objectifs, de moyens et de performances (COMP)" with the MESR. Additionally, research project costs can be supported by various funding programmes or plans following open grant procedures, including the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (currently Horizon Europe 2021-2027) and, since 2010, the "Investissements d'Avenir" programme (PIA), now termed "France 2030", covering the years 2020 to 2025. There are also several funding plans and programmes dedicated to specific fields such as energy, biomedical, and space. Aside from the PIA, France regularly adopts a dedicated general Research Law, currently the "loi de programmation pour la recherche" (Law n° 2020-1674 of 24 December 2020), which outlines objectives needing improvement and financing for the period 2021 to 2030, and includes various provisions relating to research and higher education. This law often amends the French education code and/or the research code. Additionally, sectorial fields such as agronomy, bioethics, medical, space, and nuclear are also legally regulated, often in response to the implementation of European legal instruments (EU directives or regulations). The main debates currently engaging the French public research system include the definition of the next PIA (PIA n° 5), potential amendments to the law n° 2020-1674, and the programme agencies, as announced by the President of the Republic on 7 December 2023 in a discourse on the future of French research. |
| Georgia | In 2025, the Prime Minister of Georgia initiated a higher education reform, leading to the establishment of a government commission tasked with developing a concept for carrying out the reform. By 2028, the reform aims to address infrastructure issues in universities and enhance the quality of teaching and research. The reform will also result in the renovation of outdated infrastructure and the creation of new ones as needed. GITA is actively working on advancing and developing the key innovation and technology hub in the region - Kutaisi Technology Hub. This infrastructure and the concept will encompass a Tech Park, laboratories, a conference space with a capacity of accommodating/ hosting events of several hundred people, a consulting center for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, an interactive science museum, international accelerator, offices of international technology companies etc. It is planned to integrate AI Excellence Center in the Kutaisi Technology Hub. This Center will focus on various AI domains and applications, with specialised scientists conducting advanced research in artificial intelligence. It will serve as a vital resource hub, assisting stakeholders in implementing AI-driven solutions tailored to their specific needs. The Center of Excellence will also promote collaboration between academia, the private sector, and government entities, creating an ecosystem that accelerates innovation and facilitates knowledge transfer. It will provide access to state-of-the-art computing infrastructure and develop use cases that demonstrate AI applications in priority sectors for Georgia’s economic development. |
| Germany | Science policy measures play a central role in the STI policy mix because scientific knowledge is essential in understanding and tackling societal and global challenges as well as in developing new innovative ideas. Therefore, the Federal Government puts a great emphasis on supporting the public research system. A key component of the German science policy is the utilization of joint programmes (known as pacts) involving both the Federal Government and the Länder’s (state) governments and supporting both scientific excellence and broad institutional development. To enhance Germany's future international competitiveness, initiatives such as the Pact for Research and Innovation, and the Excellence Strategy, which continued the Excellence Initiative, were first adopted in the mid-2000s and have been constantly improved ever since. The Pact for Research and Innovation provides reliable and long-term financial security for the four large non-university research organisations in Germany (Max Planck Society, Helmholtz Association, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, Leibniz Association) and the German Research Foundation (DFG). In return, the organisations commit to pursuing strategic R&I goals. This fosters research excellence and secures Germany's competitiveness. The Excellence Strategy reinforces cutting-edge research at universities via two funding lines: Clusters of Excellence and Universities of Excellence, which deliver project-based funding in internationally competitive research fields, respectively funding of excellent institutions. The Federal Government intends to evaluate the Excellence Strategy for a possible extension of the funding period beyond 2030. Research infrastructures are essential for the German research system. Thus, the Federal Government will further develop the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures and strengthen the National Research Data Infrastructure (NFDI). In context of the new “Hightech-Agenda” for Germany, the Federal Government intends to boost funding especially in the following strategic research fields: health research, marine, climate and sustainability research, humanities and social sciences, security and defence research and dual-use as well as aerospace. In health research, for example, the focus will be on personalised medicine, incurable diseases, women's health and post-infectious diseases. The Federal Government will also stimulate aerospace research by cutting-edge research and commercialisation. Moreover, it will support SMEs and start-ups to participate more in the market for space solutions. With the National Action Plan for the European Research Area (ERA), the Federal Government aims to contribute to further shaping the ERA. In addition, it will further strengthen international cooperation in research and innovation by continuing its support for the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH) and Max Weber Foundation (MWS). In times of global polarisation, the Federal Government continues to protect academic freedom and base funding decisions on science-led criteria. It is also strengthening research security by working with the Alliance of Science Organisations to develop guidelines for dealing with sensitive international cooperation, and by improving the counselling and guidance infrastructure. |
| Greece | Funding for the creation or upgrade of Research Infrastructures (RIs) is essential for supporting the public research system. During the 2014-2020 programming period, 28 National Research Infrastructures (NRIs), primarily distributed, were established based on consortia from Universities and Public Research Centres. These NRIs were selected through competitive calls and supported by a Multiannual Budgeting Plan. Their performance was evaluated by an international expert panel as part of a service request to the European Commission’s (EC) Policy Support Facility (PSF) – Country. This panel provided ten recommendations for the future development and sustainability of the NRIs at both policy and operational levels. Following this assessment, a Call for Expression of Interest was announced in 2024 to pre-select NRI projects for support that met the evaluation criteria of uniqueness in the national landscape, maturity, services to business, open access plans, adherence to FAIR criteria, long-term sustainability, and connections to the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). Additionally, substantial investments have been made under the Greek Recovery and Resilience plan to upgrade the infrastructures of 11 research centres and three technological organisations, alongside establishing a new research centre. These efforts aim to enhance research capacity and capabilities in key scientific and technological areas. |
| Hungary | The Hungarian Government is committed to organizing and supporting research activities more efficiently and effectively. This commitment aims to ensure the long-term sustainability of Hungarian scientists' research and to elevate Hungarian research to a level of international excellence and recognition. To achieve these goals, state funding for innovation in Hungary has been significantly increased in recent years, surpassing the EU average. However, further efforts are necessary to enhance Hungary's competitiveness to match the international average. The state is actively assisting micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises that are open to innovation by supporting companies in the fields of knowledge provision, universities, research institutes, and financing. The Ministry of Culture and Innovation has outlined the following priorities for supporting public research by 2025: Firstly, the National Research Excellence Programme (NKKP) will be launched under the leadership of the Council of Excellence in Research with a budget of HUF 40 billion, significantly higher than the 2023 HUF 13.5 billion, and HUF 19 billion in 2024. The strategic goal is to attract a large number of young researchers, including PhDs and postdocs, to participate in this cutting-edge research. Secondly, the government will support the modernization of Hungarian research infrastructures with HUF 26 billion, ensuring that research institutes have state-of-the-art environments and modern instruments. This initiative will also create relevant infrastructures for the corporate sector. This includes the development of a robust supercomputing infrastructure. The national HPC system, Komondor will be augmented by the Levente HPC from 2027 to improve computing capacity and include a high-performance artificial intelligence partition. HPC services may also be extended to include artificial intelligence factory developments. This infrastructure will support the development and adaptation of high-technology, including AI technologies, contributing to strategic autonomy. Additionally, the Hungarian research ecosystem is increasingly integrated into the international research community. Nearly one in three doctoral students in Hungary now comes from abroad, and the number of publications created in international cooperation has risen by 45 percent over the past decade. The government aims to further strengthen this internationality through continued support for the HU-rizont program and new bilateral cooperation, particularly focusing on the Western Balkans, Central Asia, and East Asia. In 2025, international research and innovation cooperation will be supported with HUF 16 billion. The National Research, Development and Innovation Fund (NRDI Fund), established in 2015, has been renewed and enlarged in recent years. The NRDI Fund offers predictable funding for RDI annually, endorsed by the National Science Policy Council and approved by the Minister responsible for science policy coordination. The innovation contribution paid by businesses, along with a complementary contribution from the central budget, forms a significant part of the NRDI Fund’s resources. In 2020, the NRDI Fund was divided into two parts: the Research Sub-fund and the Innovation Sub-fund. The Research Sub-fund finances socially useful research projects and programs to support excellence in higher education and research institutions, as well as individual researchers. The Innovation Sub-fund supports business innovation and market-oriented R&D activities, often in cooperation with academia, through programs with an investor approach. In 2025, calls for proposals within the NRDI Fund's 2025 Programme Strategy and the Economic Development and Innovation Operational Programme (GINOP) Plus will reach a total value of more than HUF 215 billion. |
| Iceland | Current policy discussions regarding government support for the public research system are centred around the soft funding system, its effectiveness, and the associated costs. This system comprises various soft funding products or grants, with the largest and most effective ones administered by Rannis - The Icelandic Centre for Research. This institution operates under the auspices of the Ministry for Culture, Innovation and Higher Education. The primary funding sources include the Icelandic Research Fund and the Technology Development Fund, alongside smaller funds that support public research and technology development, managed by Rannis and other ministries such as the Ministry of Health. The ongoing debate focuses on evaluating the efficacy and costs of the soft funding system. There is a consideration for consolidating funding instruments and streamlining the application process to enhance ease of use, ultimately aiming to improve their effectiveness and cost-efficiency. In addition, there are discussions on the best methods to fund international research calls and how to prioritise the fields to be supported in such calls. These debates are crucial as they determine the direction and efficiency of funding in fostering public research and development. |
| India | The equitable distribution of infrastructure, funds, and knowledge resources among institutions is crucial for a balanced and effective public research system. To achieve this, it is essential to democratise access to scholarly knowledge through national subscriptions, ensuring that all institutions, regardless of their size or prestige, have equal access to the latest research and information. This approach not only fosters a more inclusive academic environment but also enhances the overall quality of research by broadening the base of contributors and perspectives. Increasing the R&D expenditure in relation to GDP is another significant aspect that needs attention. This increase should not only focus on the total amount but also on optimising the use of limited R&D resources to achieve maximum outputs. The newly established Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) plays a pivotal role here, tasked with invigorating R&D in universities and increasing industry contributions to R&D. The foundation's strategies must include clear guidelines for balancing funding between basic research and translational research, ensuring that both areas are adequately supported to drive innovation and societal progress. Furthermore, reinvigorating the research ecosystem in universities and taking technologies from academic and research laboratories to higher Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) is critical for overcoming the failures in transfer of the technology to a level acceptable by the business for taking it forward. The ease of doing research in India is another area that requires structural, institutional, and regulatory reforms to enhance funding access, procurement processes, hiring processes, project management, reporting, administrative autonomy, and collaborations. The implementation of open science practices presents both opportunities and challenges, necessitating strengthened national policies and institutional frameworks to promote equitable access, transparency, and collaboration in research. Sharing the research data generated through the public funding via a central repository, democratization of the access to research infrastructure and scholarly knowledge to the researchers in different institutions and regions of the country has been a challenge. Coordinated efforts through the ShodhGanga, I-STEM portal and the ONOS initiative have been some of the transformative changes in this endeavor. Research security is vital for safeguarding critical technologies and sensitive scientific data from unauthorised access. Moreover, the effectiveness of existing institutional mechanisms, policy frameworks, and stakeholder initiatives in promoting research ethics and integrity needs to be evaluated. This includes addressing issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, and conflicts of interest, and contributing towards the development of comprehensive, contextually relevant National Guidelines for the Responsible Conduct of Research and Communication (RCRC) across diverse disciplines and institutions. Finally, India's research assessment practices must be aligned with the principles of responsible research evaluation, requiring reforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and the inclusion of qualitative metrics beyond quantitative metrics. In conclusion, by addressing these key areas, we can enhance the public research system significantly, making it more robust, inclusive, and aligned with national and global priorities. The focus should be on creating a synergistic relationship between funding, resource allocation, and strategic objectives to foster a thriving research culture. |
| Indonesia | Indonesia continues to face significant challenges in strengthening its research and innovation system, starting with the persistent issue of limited funding. The national research budget remains at only 0.2–0.3% of GDP, which is far below the 1% target mandated by the National Science and Technology System Law (Sisnas IPTEK). This indicates a strong reliance on the state budget and limited fiscal space for scientific advancement. The institutional transformation of the research landscape, particularly the consolidation of research and development institutions into BRIN, has sparked both support and criticism. While the move aims to streamline and strengthen national research coordination, confusion persists, especially within the public sector, about mandates for policy research. Many researchers have expressed concerns about losing direct access to policy processes that are informed by evidence. Furthermore, the absence of a clear and supportive incentive system for civil servant researchers (ASN) compounds these issues. Many face uncertainty in their career paths and lack meaningful recognition, especially at the regional level. Additionally, the use of research evidence in policymaking remains limited. This is due to poor integration of sectoral research into the policy cycle, weak demand from decision-makers, and limited coordination between planners and researchers. Moreover, collaboration between central and local governments in public research remains minimal. Despite the potential of local governments to contribute to research in sectors such as health, food, and education, there is little facilitation or support to build this capacity. The reason is that the local governments is expected to focus on practical research (e.g. how to packing processed foods by home industries), and on facilitating the utilization of research produced by research institutions. Another reason is that limitation of budget and capacity of researchers owned by local governments constraint them to conduct real research on health and food sectors, as these kinds of research usually require huge investment and more sophisticated research infrastructure that beyond local government capacity. Finally, the accessibility and management of research data is still underdeveloped. Although the government mandates that research data be stored in BRIN’s repository, many public institutions lack the necessary infrastructure to comply, further hindering knowledge sharing and reuse. |
| Ireland | Ireland's Research and Innovation (R&I) system encompasses a comprehensive range of activities including basic and applied research, experimental development, and innovation. This system has undergone significant transformation since the beginning of the 21st century. In 2023, the Government Budget Allocation for R&D (GBARD) exceeded €1 billion for the first time, reaching €1,051 million. In 2023, the Government Budget Allocation for R&D (GBARD) exceeded €1 billion for the first time, reaching €1,051 million. This marked a 9.1% increase from 2022 and a 46% rise since 2013. Projections based on survey responses estimate that GBARD will further increase by 6.0% in 2024, reaching €1,114 million. Despite these increases, the GBARD intensity rate, expressed as a percentage of GDP/GNP/GNI, remained relatively stable in 2023 at 0.21%, 0.27%, and 0.36% respectively (this information was provided by national sources and is not yet available in OECD databases as of July 2025). The government funds R&I through Research Ireland, various sectoral R&I agencies, and a block grant from the Higher Education Authority to higher education institutions, which forms the backbone of Ireland’s R&I system. This system is crucial for addressing numerous future challenges such as climate change, future pandemics, and societal shifts. Continued investment in both public and private R&I is essential to cultivate talent and foster collaboration across the system, ensuring R&I plays a pivotal role in securing a sustainable future. Under Impact 2030 Ireland is working to become an ‘Innovation Leader’ in the European Innovation Scoreboard by 2030. In 2024 Ireland was ranked tenth among EU Member States putting the country in the Strong Innovators Group. In addition, the Global Innovation Index 2024 ranked Ireland nineteenth out of 133 countries that account for 92.8% of the global population and 97.5% of the world’s GDP. Ireland's notable international rankings affirm the effectiveness of its R&I strategies and investments. However, the government acknowledges that sustained and substantial public investment is necessary to achieve its goal of becoming an 'Innovation Leader'. Ireland's new sectoral R&I strategy for the Environment, Climate, and Communications highlights the transformative potential of R&I. The Environmental Protection Agency's Research Programme Framework 2030 has pinpointed key and emerging priorities, promoting open innovation, information exchange, and operational synergies among various cross-sectoral funding organisations and research actors. The focus is also on fostering innovative start-ups, driving industry-academic collaboration, and enhancing research commercialisation. Efforts are being made to ensure that graduates are employment-ready, that Ireland is integrated into frontier technology ecosystems, and that innovation permeates all enterprise sectors. The government is committed to creating the right conditions to support an innovation-driven economy, working closely with Taighde Éireann – Research Ireland, the HEA, IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland, and other research funding bodies to develop a more cohesive national research and innovation ecosystem. |
| Israel | In Israel, the funding and prioritisation of academic research is a central issue within public research debates. In 2023, government agencies allocated approximately 6.35% of GDP to civilian R&D. Both the Council for Higher Education (CHE/VATAT) and universities advocate for an increase in this funding. The National R&D Council has also recommended that government R&D spending should be raised and that a strategic plan should be developed to enhance basic research. To address these recommendations, CHE has initiated new funding schemes. For instance, a joint programme with the Innovation Ministry set for 2024 has earmarked around ₪100 million to facilitate the translation of academic research into practical applications. This highlights a broader debate on the balance between funding "blue sky" basic research and mission-driven projects. CHE generally prioritises academic excellence and the development of long-term research infrastructure, whereas other ministries advocate for targeted funding that aligns with national priorities. Another significant issue is the evaluation of research and the allocation of funding. Currently, Israeli universities receive block grants, which critics argue are not sufficiently linked to outcomes. In response, there have been proposals to introduce performance criteria or competitive grants for universities. For example, the R&D Council has suggested the creation of "platforms" or consortiums to foster academia-industry collaboration, without micromanaging individual grants. Additionally, there is ongoing debate about enhancing public-sector salaries and career tracks to retain researchers, particularly in light of recent salary freezes. Overall, policy discussions are focused on increasing public investment in R&D while reforming the distribution of these funds across higher education. |
| Italy | In 2024, Italy continues to prioritize strengthening its public research system, focusing on strategic, mission-oriented research in emerging sectors such as green technologies, digital transformation, health innovation, and sustainable development. This aligns with the EU Framework Programme and its Missions. The enhancement of public-private partnerships is central to these efforts, emphasizing the creation of five agile national research centers (related to the five Italian national research priorities - HPC, Big Data e Quantum Computing, Agri-tech, Sustainable Mobility, Biodiversity and Development of Gene Therapy and mRNA-Based Drugs) that foster innovation ecosystems involving industry, academia, and local territories. At the European level, the dialogue centers on deepening Italy’s engagement with Horizon Europe and the ERA Policy Agenda 2024. This includes reinforcing transnational collaborations and leadership roles in key partnerships, notably the Sustainable Blue Economy. Discussions also emphasize expanding cooperation with Mediterranean and neighboring countries through frameworks like the PRIMA initiative. At the global level, Italy is committed to the internationalization of its research system. This includes promoting researcher mobility, cross-border projects, and the development of world-class infrastructures, such as the Einstein Telescope. Additionally, the space economy and exploration are prominent topics, reflecting Italy’s ambition to be a key player in global scientific initiatives. The National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) remains a pivotal policy instrument, channeling substantial investments (€9.09 billion under Mission 4, Component 2 “from research to industry”) into expanding research capacities, doctoral education, technology transfer, and innovation ecosystems. This reinforces the public research system’s role in driving Italy’s scientific and economic competitiveness. |
| Japan | In response to the Sixth STI Basic Plan, the government has allocated an initial budget for FY2023, contributing to a total science and technology budget of approximately 21.9 trillion yen (this information was provided by national sources and figures may differ from those in OECD databases). This funding is part of a broader strategy to achieve investment targets of around 30 trillion yen for government R&D and 120 trillion yen for combined public and private R&D investment. The aim is to enhance knowledge creation and drive the economic and social values essential for realising Society 5.0. |
| Kazakhstan | Kazakhstan’s public research system is currently undergoing a significant transformation, accompanied by active policy debates regarding the nature, scope, and effectiveness of government support. These debates are reflective of a broader national effort to align the public research agenda with the country’s long-term socio-economic priorities, industrial modernisation objectives, and aspirations for global competitiveness in science and innovation. One of the central themes of these discussions concerns the predominant role of the state in financing and directing public research. Although government expenditure on R&D has increased substantially, overall investment in research remains low relative to GDP (approximately 0.16%). This has prompted a sustained dialogue on how to diversify funding sources and reduce the overreliance on state budgets. Key proposals include strengthening co-financing mechanisms, introducing performance-based funding, and operationalising the recently adopted legislative provision requiring subsoil users to allocate 1% of their capital expenditures to scientific and technological development. Nevertheless, concerns remain regarding the clarity of implementation pathways, consistency with existing fiscal regulations, and the ability of sectoral stakeholders to absorb and manage these funds. Another key point of contention relates to the appropriate balance between centralised and decentralised governance in public research administration. The 2025 reform granting local executive authorities the mandate to initiate and fund regionally targeted research programmes has been welcomed as an opportunity to promote localised research and ensure greater responsiveness to regional development challenges. However, the shift has also sparked concerns regarding the uneven institutional capacity of regional actors, potential duplication of efforts, and risks of strategic fragmentation. As a result, national stakeholders continue to debate how best to ensure policy coherence, quality assurance, and alignment between regional and national priorities. A third prominent debate involves the strategic orientation of publicly funded research—namely, the tension between support for fundamental science and the increasing emphasis on applied, commercially oriented research. The adoption of the 2024 Law on Science and Technological Policy marked a paradigmatic shift in this regard, introducing Technology Readiness Level (TRL) frameworks, commercialisation metrics, and incentives for industry engagement. While many stakeholders support this reorientation as necessary for enhancing the practical utility and economic contribution of research, others, particularly within the academic community, have expressed concern that insufficient support for basic science could undermine long-term knowledge generation and diminish the country’s capacity for scientific discovery in fields that are not immediately commercially viable. Furthermore, there are ongoing policy discussions surrounding the structure, governance, and performance of public research institutions. Many institutions face legacy constraints, including outdated infrastructure, limited administrative autonomy, and insufficient incentives for high-impact research. In response, various reform proposals have been tabled, including the introduction of institutional performance agreements, the consolidation of research and education functions, enhanced international collaboration, and the implementation of competitive research funding schemes that reward excellence and innovation. Evaluation and impact assessment frameworks are also the subject of review. While Kazakhstan has made notable progress in developing commercialisation metrics and applying TRL-based evaluation, the absence of a robust national framework for comprehensive, independent evaluation of public research remains a challenge. Current debates focus on the feasibility of establishing an independent research evaluation agency or expanding the mandates of existing institutions such as the Science Fund and National Scientific Councils to include evaluation functions. There is growing interest in aligning Kazakhstan’s assessment practices with global standards, which advocate for multidimensional and context-sensitive evaluation criteria. The internationalisation of the public research system has also become an increasingly salient topic. Policymakers recognise that Kazakhstan’s scientific ecosystem must become more globally integrated through partnerships with leading international institutions, participation in multinational research initiatives (e.g., Horizon Europe, UNESCO, CERN), and increased researcher mobility. However, structural barriers—including limited foreign language capacity, regulatory restrictions, and underdeveloped institutional frameworks for international engagement—remain significant, prompting further debate on how to enable and support outward-looking research collaboration. Lastly, concerns regarding human capital development and the sustainability of the research workforce have featured prominently in policy discourse. Although the total number of researchers has grown in recent years, there are persistent challenges related to generational renewal, retention of early-career researchers, and the availability of attractive career paths. Particular attention is being paid to the development of incentive structures for PhD graduates, the modernisation of recruitment practices, and the promotion of interdisciplinary and industry-linked research careers. The policy debate surrounding Kazakhstan’s public research system is multifaceted and evolving. It is driven by the need to optimise the allocation of public resources, enhance research impact, decentralise decision-making, and ensure the long-term sustainability of scientific institutions and talent. The outcome of these discussions will be instrumental in shaping Kazakhstan’s transition to a knowledge-based economy and in strengthening its position in the global science and innovation landscape. |
| Korea | The recent policy shift in South Korea's national R&D budget has sparked significant debate. For the first time in 33 years, the R&D budget for 2024 was reduced by 15% to 26.5 trillion KRW. This reduction is part of a broader initiative to reassess and restructure national R&D projects, focusing on strategic orientations and efficient management of public R&D investment. Despite the overall budget cuts, the government has increased investments in specific strategic areas such as biotechnology, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, quantum computing, semiconductors, secondary batteries, and space exploration. These national strategic technologies received an allocation of 5 trillion KRW in 2024, which is a 6.3% increase from the previous year. This targeted approach is intended to enhance South Korea's competitiveness in these key sectors. However, this abrupt reduction was implemented without extensive consultation with the scientific community, raising concerns about the future of basic research, the potential for a brain drain, and the robustness of the innovation ecosystem. Critics argue that while focusing on strategic technologies may boost competitiveness in the short term, it could undermine the broader research ecosystem by neglecting fundamental research areas that are essential for long-term innovation. In response to these criticisms, the Korean government has revised its approach and increased the public R&D budget to 29.6 trillion KRW, marking an 11.5% increase. Further increases are planned for 2026. This adjustment reflects a recognition of the critical feedback from the research community and an attempt to balance strategic technological advancements with the foundational research that underpins sustainable innovation. Other debates include research and technology security as prominent issues as global strategic competitions intensify. To address these concerns, MSIT and relevant ministries are developing a comprehensive strategy and guidelines for research security. This has sparked a debate on how to effectively balance the demands of international STI collaboration with the needs for research and technology security. |
| Latvia | The key debates surrounding government support for the public research system are multifaceted and currently focused on several critical areas: Firstly, there is a pressing need to prioritise defence in the short-to-medium term. Recent geopolitical challenges, notably the war in Ukraine, have underscored the urgency of ramping up investment in defence-related research. This includes areas such as cybersecurity and quantum technologies. While government R&D funding has seen significant growth, the increasing need to support research that contributes directly to defence goals has led to discussions about the allocation of resources, which is at tension with the broader requirement to enhance R&D investment. Secondly, the discussion on the need for more focused investment in public research is gaining traction. Stakeholders are debating whether R&D funding should be more concentrated on specific niches of strategic development. Although the RIS3 strategy has outlined defined areas of focus, these are still considered broad by some stakeholders, who argue for a narrower focus. Within the governance boards of RIS3, each area has the potential to highlight particular topics that require more concentrated efforts. |
| Lithuania | Lithuania has made significant strides in enhancing its public research and development (R&D) funding, particularly in the higher education and government sectors. Following the Agreement on Lithuanian Education Policy for 2021–2030, which was endorsed by all political parties in the parliament, the country committed to allocating 1% of GDP to R&D by 2030. In 2024, public budget R&D funding reached 0.46% of GDP, with an increase of nearly €79 million compared to the previous year. This marked a 0.09 percentage point increase relative to GDP. Over the period from 2022 to 2024, government funding for R&D doubled in absolute terms, rising from €185 million in 2021 (0.31% of GDP) to €348 million in 2024. Furthermore, the approved 2025 national budget reflects a planned increase in funding, with expectations to reach 0.52% of GDP. In addition to funding increases, significant progress has been made in areas such as open science, research careers, and access to excellence. Notable initiatives include financing for the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC), competence-based career reforms, and the transfer of funding from the 2021–2027 EU Funds Investment Programme to Horizon Europe projects. The Research Council of Lithuania has also developed the fourth edition of the Lithuanian Research Infrastructure Roadmap in 2024. This updated roadmap describes the national research infrastructure ecosystem, its development drivers, and emerging opportunities. It proposes long-term policy directions and priorities for research infrastructures, including a list of Lithuanian research infrastructures recommended for priority investment and active participation in international research infrastructure consortia. Moreover, Lithuania has joined two significant international research infrastructures: SHARE ERIC – the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, and CESSDA ERIC – the Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives. These memberships are expected to enhance Lithuania's integration into the European research area and contribute to the development of a robust national research infrastructure. |
| Malta | Recommendations from the PSF Peer Review of Malta’s R&I ecosystem include consolidating various R&I funding instruments into a single coherent framework. This consolidation aims to increase knowledge sharing across the government's scientific community and streamline the development of R&I priority setting. Furthermore, Malta seeks to capitalize on opportunities from the framework programme and the ERA Policy Agenda. These efforts are intended to boost the capacities and potential of the local R&I community, enhance national and institutional cooperation, foster the production, diffusion, and uptake of high-quality knowledge, and stimulate collaborative links and networks with other EU countries. These combined activities are expected to significantly enhance the competitiveness and inclusiveness of Malta’s national R&I ecosystem. Science Malta, as the national entity responsible for promoting the R&I framework programme, facilitates the services of the Horizon Europe national contact points (NCPs). These NCPs support local R&I actors in applying for funding under the programme’s various Widening instruments. To date, Maltese applicants have successfully secured funding from instruments such as Twinning, Excellence Hubs, ERA Chairs, ERA Talents, and the Hop-on Facility. Additionally, Malta participates in the ERA action 16 sub-group on ‘access to Excellence – R&I and Cohesion Managing Authorities network’. The country plans to use the insights gained from this sub-group to enhance R&I investments and synergies between the Horizon Europe and ERDF funding programmes. This is particularly significant given that Malta has transferred 5 million Euros from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to Horizon Europe under the Operational Programme 2021-2027. |
| Mexico | The reform of Article 3 of the Mexican Constitution concerning humanities, science, and technology marked a significant advancement for the public research system by acknowledging every person's right to benefit from scientific and technological innovation. It also established the State's obligation to support scientific, humanistic, and technological research and innovation by guaranteeing sufficient resources and incentives. Furthermore, the new 2023 Law on Humanities, Science, Technology, and Innovation sets up an institutional framework to support and promote research within the public research system through the creation of a National Agenda. This agenda outlines strategic actions related to issues deemed crucial for national development and public interest in the fields of humanities, science, technology, and innovation. Due to budgetary constraints and the management of these resources—stemming from the integration of this National Agenda—current political debates focus on the State’s authority in determining the strategic research topics to be developed by the public research system. The core of the debate is whether government support should prioritise research that addresses public policy challenges defined by the State (at both the national and local levels), or whether scientific, humanistic, and technological research should be autonomously directed by the academic and scientific communities within higher education institutions and research centres. This discussion also explores how to ensure that the collective benefits of scientific and technological development reach the broader population, necessitating stronger connections between scientific communities and society. Another related debate concerns identifying the most effective mechanisms to stimulate the public research system using government subsidies. Over the past decades, the National System of Researchers (SNII, by its acronym in Spanish) has played a pivotal role in the development of science and technology in Mexico by providing incentives that support long-term research efforts and the professional growth of the scientific community. Given the SNII's national and international importance, its preservation is critical. However, this also raises questions about budget allocation priorities to ensure stable funding for research and scientific development, and to support projects leading to tangible outputs such as products and patents. |
| Netherlands | In the first half of 2025, an evaluation of publicly funded applied research organisations, known as the TO2 organisations, will be released. This evaluation will be crucial in shaping a new strategy for these organisations in the subsequent years. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science has outlined domestic priorities in a recent policy letter, which can be accessed for further details. This document is essential for understanding the future direction of public research and its alignment with national educational and cultural objectives. |
| New Zealand | The primary policy debates surrounding government support for the public research system in New Zealand focus on the level of funding, the structure of the research institutions, and the balance between economic outcomes and broader societal benefits. Concerns have been raised that New Zealand's investment in research and development has not kept pace with international benchmarks. This lag in investment could lead to a loss of talent and a slower pace of innovation compared to other small, innovation-driven nations. Recent reforms have proposed the creation of Public Research Organisations with specific areas of focus, including bio-economy, earth sciences, health, forensic sciences, and advanced technology. This initiative aims to reduce duplication and enhance collaboration among research institutions. However, some stakeholders have expressed concerns about the potential loss of specialized expertise in areas such as climate science, conservation, and social sciences. Additionally, there is apprehension that the strong emphasis on economic outcomes may overshadow the importance of fundamental, exploratory research. This includes research that addresses critical social and environmental challenges, as well as Mātauranga Māori, the traditional knowledge of the Māori people. |
| Norway | Following the recent release of the White Paper on the Research System, a key debate has emerged regarding the adequacy of the research and innovation system. Specifically, there are concerns about whether the yearly allocation of public funding for research meets the high expectations for excellence and the research community's role in addressing significant societal challenges. An analysis of the Government’s 2025 budget proposal reveals a 1.4 percent decline in public research funding from the previous year, according to NIFU's 2024 report. According to the NIFU analyses, an increasing share of the budget for research and devlopment is related to issues that are not directly under research policy priorities. Moreover, the budgetting system for the Research Council of Norway has changed, making comparison between last budget years and the comming year difficult. However, a decline in appropriations to universitites and university colleges is due to the budget being corrected for additional appropriations to educational activities during the pandemic. The discussion also extends to whether the current investment in research and innovation is sufficient for Norway to foster radical technological innovations and enhance competitiveness. This is crucial as the nation faces demographic shifts and a noticeable shortage of qualified workers across various sectors and industries. Questions are being raised about the system's effectiveness in contributing to competitiveness and innovation that could lead to the creation of new businesses or the scaling up of existing ones, as well as innovations and improvements in public services. Furthermore, there is an ongoing debate on how to optimally balance the main sources of public funding for research and innovation. This includes the mix between subsidies, loans, and tax incentives, as well as the balance between national and EU funding, direct institutional support, and funding through agencies. There has been a longstanding discussion on how to increase private funding and pursue multiple objectives within the same funding mechanism, known as blended financing. The goal is to elevate private funding to 2 percent of GDP. Notably, Norway has a higher level of public funding for research and a lower level of private funding compared to the OECD average. |
| Peru | In Peru, there is a unanimous opinion among the actors within the National System of Science, Technology and Innovation (SINACTI) regarding the importance of strengthening the public research system. This can be achieved by increasing investment in digital infrastructure and continuously promoting research across various institutions, including research institutes and both public and private universities. Additionally, there is a focus on consolidating scientific integrity. Scientific integrity is a highly important issue in Peru due to the events that have occurred in relation to the ‘scientific publication factory’. In response to this, a series of talks have been held to raise awareness among researchers so that they can carry out their scientific practices with integrity. Currently, this issue has already been regulated through the Code of Scientific Integrity, which contains principles, good practices, a guide for carrying out scientific activities, responsibilities, the creation of a Scientific Integrity Committee (CIC) and the infractions and sanctions for non-compliance. The generation of scientific and technological knowledge hinges on two fundamental aspects: highly qualified human talent and adequate infrastructure and equipment. These resources are crucial for conducting STI activities and producing efficient solutions to societal problems. Ultimately, this enhances productivity, competitiveness, and market access through economically and environmentally sustainable processes. To democratize scientific knowledge and development, there is a strong need to promote open science. This approach will allow a greater amount of research to be accessible to different departmental actors of SINACTI. Currently, progress has been made in providing open access to the different IT platforms (PeruCRIS) and databases (ALICIA, RENACYT, etc.), although work remains to be done on the management of the use of secondary data and information security. Moreover, in line with the global trend of the growing use and disruptive capacity of emerging technologies, there is a proposal to increase scientific production in areas such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, biotechnology, and the internet of things. This increase should consider the adoption of good practices in research. |
| Poland | A commonly held view within the scientific community, which is echoed repeatedly by various scientific bodies, is that there is insufficient funding for the science and education system, despite its growth in recent years. This underfunding hampers the proper utilisation of potential, resulting in a low number of doctoral students, limited mobility of scientists, a small number of doctorates obtained abroad, and joint publications with researchers from other countries. Additionally, Poland holds a low position in the EU concerning publications primarily linked to basic research and there is incomplete utilisation of the research infrastructure. The National Centre for Research and Development (NCBR) and the National Science Centre (NCN) are executive agencies, as defined by the Act on public finances, established to carry out tasks in the fields of science, technology, and innovation policy of the state. The NCN's mission is to support scientific activity in the field of basic research, which includes experimental or theoretical work. Conversely, the NCBR's task is to support Polish research units and enterprises in creating and using the results of scientific research in practice. Both NCN and NCBR cooperate in the implementation of their tasks. In line with the new State Scientific Policy adopted by the government in 2022, there is wide-ranging support for the demands put forward by scientific bodies. The policy aims to support the execution of high-quality research and the optimal utilisation of scientific knowledge while ensuring the autonomy of higher education institutions. The fundamental objective for science is to meet the needs of society and the economy, contribute to enhancing the quality of life, and build Poland’s competitive edge in the international arena. This will be achieved by prioritising activities, continually improving the quality of teaching and research, increasing the attractiveness of research and academic careers, transferring knowledge and technology from academia to industry, and striving for technological self-sufficiency through creating Polish know-how. Additionally, it involves supporting academic mobility, cultivating a positive image of Polish science globally, and strengthening its international impact. The main ongoing policy debates around government support for the public research system in Poland centre on several key issues. These include the levels and allocation of funding, with ongoing concern over the adequacy of public funding for research and development. The debate focuses on the effectiveness of how funds are allocated and whether they are distributed equitably across different research fields. There is also a division among policymakers on whether to prioritise funding for high-impact, world-class research or to distribute resources more widely across the public research system to foster broader scientific development. Some argue for greater support for research excellence to raise Poland’s global scientific profile, while others believe funding should be more inclusive, supporting a variety of fields and institutions. Furthermore, there is a growing call for stronger collaboration between academia and the private sector. While Poland has made progress, the private sector’s engagement with public research institutions is still limited. Some advocate for more policies that incentivise business partnerships and innovation, while others argue for better safeguards to protect academic freedom and prevent commercialisation from overshadowing fundamental research. Additionally, there is criticism regarding the current evaluation system for public research, with concerns that it may focus too much on quantitative metrics, such as publications and citations, rather than the broader societal impact of research. The debate centres on whether to reform evaluation processes to better reflect the diverse outputs and benefits of public research. Lastly, with many talented researchers leaving Poland for better opportunities abroad, there is debate about how the government can incentivise top researchers to stay, both through better funding and creating a more attractive working environment. Some propose offering competitive salaries and research grants, while others suggest reforms to the broader research ecosystem to improve career prospects. |
| Portugal | In recent years, the debate surrounding the public research system has focused on the necessity to enhance funding from both public and private sources for research careers in academia and beyond, as well as revising the Legal Regime of Higher Education Institutions (RJIES). The 2007 RJIES no longer mirrors the diversity and complexity of today’s research ecosystem. A revised regime is crucial to bolster Higher education institution (HEI) autonomy while ensuring accountability and reflecting the differentiated missions of universities and polytechnics. The independent commission concluded its work by the end of 2023, which was followed by a public consultation process involving academic, social, and economic stakeholders. However, the dissolution of the Parliament in March 2025 delayed its approval to the next legislative cycle. The Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation (MECI) is committed to revising the funding model for public HEIs, which currently depends mainly on historical budget allocations. An OECD study suggested that core (formula-based) financing could be complemented with funding through multiannual contracts with each institution to address their territorial, social, and demographic specificities. The OECD report highlighted that a new allocation model would necessitate a transitional period and increased resources. One of the objectives for the Portuguese science system is to achieve an overall investment in R&D of 3% of GDP by 2030, with the public and private sectors contributing 1.25% and 1.75%, respectively. In 2023, private expenditure on R&D was 1.104% of GDP (business and not-for-profit sectors), while public expenditure was 0.59% (Government and Higher Education sectors). Public expenditure was primarily executed in the HE sector, with the Government sector playing a much smaller role (0.51% and 0.08%, respectively). To meet the 2030 targets, the public research system must leverage diverse and competitive funding sources beyond the State Budget, including centrally managed European funds (e.g., Horizon Europe), structural and cohesion funds under Portugal 2030, and investments from the Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP). Strengthening international collaboration and enhancing institutional capacity to compete for these funds are central priorities. Boosting private sector engagement in R&D remains a structural challenge. Achieving the 2030 targets will require sustained efforts to integrate scientific knowledge into industry, public services, and society, contributing to the green and digital transitions and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. In the update of the RRP, science received an investment of 93 million euros, aimed at strengthening and creating programmes to be implemented by the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) until March 2026. The "Science + Digital" programme has 48 million euros to accelerate the digital transformation and digitisation of science and the services that support the scientific system. This includes the creation of a Science and Technology Campus open to society, a Science Desk (physical and online), the creation of the National Center for Advanced Computing, and the implementation of the national programme for open science and open research data, providing a network of infrastructures, services, and tools to support open science and the management of FAIR research data. |
| Republic of Moldova | The public research system in the Republic of Moldova is currently at the centre of several critical policy debates. These debates focus on issues such as funding, institutional reform, and the integration of Moldovan research with European initiatives. A significant development has been the establishment of the National Agency for Research and Development (NARD), which aims to centralise and streamline the evaluation and funding of research projects. This move is expected to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of research administration in Moldova. Moreover, Moldova's association with the EU's Horizon Europe programme has provided local researchers with new opportunities to engage in European research initiatives. This association is pivotal in elevating the international profile of Moldovan research and offers a platform for researchers to collaborate on a broader scale. Despite these advancements, the research infrastructure in Moldova remains inadequate, and there is a noticeable gap in experience concerning international project collaboration. To mitigate these challenges, the Horizon Europe Office in Moldova has been actively providing training and support to researchers. This initiative aims to increase their participation in and success rates of securing EU funding. The research community continues to advocate for increased investment and improved conditions, which are essential for fostering a robust research environment in Moldova. |
| Romania | The Romanian national research and development system includes a variety of organisations authorised to conduct R&D as their primary activity. This encompasses 55 public higher education institutions with 407 faculties and 35 private higher education institutions with 139 faculties. Additionally, there are 41 National R&D Institutes (INCDs) predominantly in technical and engineering fields, coordinated by the Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digitalisation (MCID), with a few others under different ministries. The Romanian Academy (RA) oversees 51 research institutes and 18 research centres, which receive direct funding from the state budget and operate under the Academy's scientific sections. The National Strategy for Research, Innovation and Smart Specialisation 2022-2027 (SNCISI) aims to address issues such as fragmentation and insufficient funding in public research organisations (PROs). It calls for individual evaluations of all public research organisations to enhance their competitiveness. Complementing this, the National Recovery and Resilience Plan’s (PNRR) Reform 5 focuses on integrating Romanian research organisations into the European Research Area (ERA). This reform advocates for periodic evaluations to identify possible synergies and mergers among research institutes, with financial and non-financial support contingent on these evaluations' outcomes. Law no. 25/2023 facilitates the voluntary integration of research, development, and innovation organisations into the ERA and amends Government Ordinance no. 57/2002 on scientific research and technological development. Romania has committed to eight strategically selected ERA Actions, addressing specific national challenges. Notably, Romania performs above the European Union average in terms of the participation of women in science. The SNCISI also seeks to tackle the perennial challenges of underfunding, unpredictability, and a shortage of skilled personnel in the national RDI system. |
| Serbia | Serbia continues to enhance its public research system by focusing on a balanced mix of institutional and competitive project funding. The key challenge is ensuring the long-term stability and development of public research organizations through predictable institutional funding while simultaneously promoting excellence and competitiveness through project-based support. The establishment of the Science Fund in 2019 marked a significant advancement in this area. This fund has been actively conducting competitive calls that target highly innovative, state-of-the-art research ideas, often without predefined thematic focus, as well as calls specifically supporting young researchers. and researcher profiles, thereby fostering a dynamic research environment. In addition, the Fund occasionally launches thematically oriented calls, such as those in the fields of green technologies and artificial intelligence, which align with broader governmental priorities. Additionally, the NITRA plays a crucial role in implementing reforms within the public research sector through the Serbia Accelerating Innovation and Growth Entrepreneurship (SAIGE) project. Funded by €84.5 million from the World Bank and EU IPA 2019, SAIGE aims to enhance the quality, relevance, and management capacities of public R&D institutes (RDIs). By 2022, 20 RDIs had initiated institutional transformation plans, with ongoing support for these initiatives. The Science Fund has established itself as a key operational institution, supporting scientific research across various fields. Furthermore, an additional €25 million from the World Bank is set to advance AI development and biotechnology (BIO4) in Serbia. These efforts collectively contribute to the transformation and modernisation of Serbia's public research landscape, ensuring it remains responsive to both current and future challenges. |
| Slovak Republic | No responses have been provided in 2025. |
| Slovenia | With the adoption of the new legislation in 2021, the Slovenian research system underwent significant changes. These changes included increasing public funding to 1% of GDP by 2027, introducing block (lump-sum) funding for research institutions, and increasing the autonomy of these institutions. Additionally, key performance indicators were introduced along with negotiations for six-year performance agreements. The legislation also introduced incentive pay for researchers and involved various ministries in science policy and financing. A new strategic framework, the Resolution on the Slovenian Scientific Research and Innovation Strategy 2030, was also established. The debate now centres on the practical implementation of a whole-government approach, which aims to improve cooperation between different ministries and agencies, stabilise and thematically concentrate funding, and enhance international cooperation. Efforts are also focused on actions to improve knowledge transfer, enhance synergies, and implement open science principles within the research system. The debate is ongoing at various levels, including ministerial working groups, political discussions, and public debates. The Development Council of the Republic of Slovenia plays a crucial role as a strategic advisory body that includes all relevant stakeholders. Additionally, within the Recovery and Resilience Plan, a new programme committee for the operational coordination of STI policy was established, providing a platform to improve cooperation. New instruments for enhancing the evaluation system of the R&I system are being implemented to support improved governance of STI. These reforms aim to better coordinate and cooperate between key public policy actors and stakeholders in the R&I system, which has been identified as a key challenge in the past. This is expected to boost investment, increase competitiveness, and ensure sustainable economic growth and development. Furthermore, activities to improve the supporting environment for international cooperation are being implemented, and synergies between different funding sources, including Horizon Europe, RRF, ESIF, and national funding, are being strengthened. |
| South Africa | Another major policy debate concerns the equitable distribution of funding between research and innovation. The renaming of the Department of Science and Technology to the Department of Science, Technology and Innovation signifies a strategic shift towards integrating innovation into various sectors, including grassroots communities and technical colleges. This shift necessitates new performance metrics in funding decisions, such as research impact, relevance, and the incorporation of design thinking and enhanced research communication. Furthermore, discussions on multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research are prominent, highlighting the need for policies that support collaborative approaches and open access to publicly funded research. These discussions also address the importance of funding research groups or teams rather than individual researchers, promoting a more collective approach to scientific inquiry. |
| Spain | In recent years, R&D expenditure in the public sector has increased markedly, reaching historic highs in 2023 with an amount of 9,700.9 million euros, representing a 39.5% increase over the last three years. Similarly, the number of R&D staff at public research centers and universities has consistently increased. This growth in funding and staffing is attributed to both a greater budgetary effort from national funds and an increase in funds from the Resilience and Recovery Facility (RRF), which has been partly allocated to finance RDI activities and infrastructures in public research and universities. Efforts are also being made to increase the permanent staff of public research organisations and to improve the evaluation system toward an objective-based evaluation of the activity of public centres and their staff, particularly researchers. Beyond promoting high-quality scientific and technical knowledge and strengthening institutions and research centers, Spain is committed to research in disruptive scientific and technological fields with high transformative potential. These fields include biotechnology, artificial intelligence, robotics, Industry 5.0, quantum computing, and nuclear fusion energy. Additionally, there is a focus on enhancing the transfer of public research results to society and fostering collaboration, including participation in international technological cooperation programmes. To adapt scientific research to new needs, it is essential to encourage the development of scientific, technical and technological careers and strengthen existing ones. This adaptation also involves implementing new infrastructures and ensuring their adequate maintenance and improvement. These infrastructures must meet very demanding scientific requirements while ensuring accessibility, safety, and sustainability, especially considering the high energy consumption of much scientific equipment. Furthermore, access to incubation spaces, platforms with scalable laboratories, and testbeds is being promoted to encourage the creation of spinoffs based on knowledge generated in the public sector. Achieving this requires fostering entrepreneurship and a business culture and guaranteeing the protection of technological innovations. |
| Sweden | In late 2023, a committee recommended a significant restructuring of the Swedish R&D funding system. The proposal suggested reducing the number of funding agencies from over twenty to just two or three. This reorganisation is set to be further examined by the government. According to the STI Bill, the government plans to centralise the responsibility for announcing and allocating external state research funding to the primary research funders. A thorough review is slated to determine the extent of this funding, which activities will be transferred, and how proposal calls should be structured in cooperation with the relevant authorities. Additionally, the capacity of the primary research funders to assume these responsibilities will be assessed. Moreover, the government has tasked the Swedish Research Council and Vinnova with exploring the possibility of a joint application and management system. Following their investigation, conducted in dialogue with the relevant authorities, they are expected to establish such a system based on their findings. This initiative aims to streamline processes and improve the efficiency of funding allocation. |
| Switzerland | While Switzerland’s research system traditionally thrives on a bottom-up, researcher-driven model, there is an ongoing debate about the need for more targeted, top-down initiatives to address emerging global issues. The challenge lies in finding the right balance between granting researchers the freedom to innovate and implementing strategic measures that direct scientific efforts towards addressing critical societal needs. Ascertaining Switzerland’s position in the European research landscape remains a priority. After concluding negotiations with the EU at the end of 2024, transitional arrangements have been established that grant Swiss stakeholders near-complete access to calls for proposals under Horizon Europe, Euratom, and the Digital Europe Programme. However, full participation in these initiatives still hinges on ratification by both the Swiss and European parliaments. In 2021, the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and swissuniversities launched the National Open Research Data (ORD) Strategy. This strategy outlines principles and measures to promote open access to research data, encouraging researchers to share their data in repositories accessible to all stakeholders. The ORD Strategy aims to foster a culture of data sharing and reuse, which is crucial for interdisciplinary research and innovation. The SNSF also mandates that all publications resulting from its funded projects be openly accessible, aligning with the principles of Open Access. Current challenges include finding the right balance between promoting open science and research and ensuring research security. Emerging challenges in the context of research security include increasing risks of unwanted knowledge transfers, intellectual property theft, data leakage, and the potential misuse of dual-use technology. A coordinated response to these challenges is essential. |
| Thailand | In 2022, public sector R&D expenditure in Thailand totaled 42.78 billion THB, which represented 21.24% of the gross domestic expenditure on R&D (GERD). GERD itself accounted for 1.16% of the country's GDP. From 2017 to 2022, government sector R&D spending grew at an average annual rate of 13.24%. Notably, between 2021 and 2022, public R&D expenditure rose sharply by 31.28%, highlighting the government's strong commitment to advancing science and research. In January 2025, the cabinet approved a total budget of 160.136 billion THB for higher education and science for fiscal year 2026, allocating 115 billion THB to higher education and 44.9 billion THB to science, research, and innovation, representing increases of 6.5% and 6.9% from the previous year, respectively. Thailand’s public research efforts are guided by two key interconnected plans: the Science, Research and Innovation Plan 2023-2027 and the Bio-Circular-Green Economy (BCG) Action Plan 2021-2027. The Science, Research and Innovation Plan, aligned with the four strategic pillars of the Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation Policy and Strategy 2023-2027, focuses on priority areas such as vaccine development, advanced therapy medicinal products, functional ingredients, premium food exports, tourism, electric vehicles, innovation-driven enterprises, and addressing challenges in ageing society, poverty, local economy, and carbon neutrality. The BCG Action Plan consists of four pillars aimed at promoting sustainability of biological resources, strengthening communities and grassroots economy, upgrading Thai BCG industries, and building resilience to global changes. To build future readiness and strengthen resilience in an increasingly dynamic world, it is vital for Thailand to invest in frontier science and advanced technology. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) and synthetic biology (SynBio) have attracted growing attention within Thailand’ public research system due to their potential to power future industries and contribute to sustainable green growth. In July 2022, the cabinet approved the Thailand National AI Strategy and Action Plan (2022 – 2027), which aims to establish a supportive ecosystem for AI development to enhance the economy and quality of life by 2027. This plan outlines strategic areas including preparing Thailand’s readiness for AI adoption, developing national infrastructure, enhancing human capital, promoting AI technology innovation, and encouraging AI use across sectors. Meanwhile, SynBio has followed a more collaborative path with the establishment of the SynBio Consortium in 2021. This consortium, composed of government agencies, academic and research institutions, and industry stakeholders, leads the formulation of the SynBio Ecosystem Development Roadmap. This roadmap, currently being refined based on a 2024 study, focuses on building a supportive ecosystem, accelerating knowledge and skills development, expanding industry and market reach, and enhancing international collaboration. Public academic and research institutions are a major source of innovation in Thailand. To accelerate the commercialisation of these innovations, the Thailand Research and Innovation Utilisation Promotion (TRIUP) Act B.E. 2564 (2021) was introduced to allow institutions to retain ownership of inventions made with government funding and manage their intellectual property. In addition, the university holding company (UHC) model has been promoted to enhance flexibility in investment and technology commercialisation. Strengthening collaboration between research organizations, universities, and industry is crucial for building an innovation-driven economy and preparing a skilled future workforce. Public research policy now prioritizes co-creation, with initiatives like The Programme Management Unit on Area-Based Development (PMU A) fostering partnerships for community development and grassroots economic growth, while the Programme Management Unit for Competitiveness (PMUC) drives industry-academia collaboration with private co-investment to accelerate market-ready innovations. |
| Türkiye | The Turkish government continues to prioritise strengthening the national R&D and innovation ecosystem, emphasising the importance of public funding for both public and private sector research activities. A significant policy debate revolves around enhancing the effectiveness and coordination of public research funding in response to global challenges such as climate change, disaster preparedness, mitigation, recovery and resilience, digital and green transformation, and national technological sovereignty. The increasing complexity of these challenges has driven calls for a more systemic, interdisciplinary, and co-creation-oriented R&D model, fostering collaboration across academia, industry, and government. By integrating these priorities into its research and innovation agenda, Türkiye seeks to leverage STI advancements to build a safer, more resilient society, ensuring that its R&D ecosystem addresses both immediate risks and long-term sustainability. The Twelfth Development Plan (2024–2028), the first long-term strategy aligned with Türkiye’s 2053 net-zero emission vision, is now in effect. It emphasises sustainable development, green and digital transformation, high value-added production, and positioning Türkiye as a global innovation hub. This plan was prepared through a participatory process involving Special Expertise Commissions and reinforces the integration of STI into all policy domains. Annual public investment programmes, the 6550 Law on Support for Research Infrastructures, and support programmes of the Council of Higher Education (CoHE) are developed in line with the Development Plans. TÜBİTAK remains the leading agency funding research projects across universities, research centres, and industry. Additional ministries—such as those responsible for health, agriculture, energy, transportation, and education—provide targeted research funding aligned with national goals. Besides TÜBİTAK, TÜSEB, especially in the health field, supports promoting inter, multi, and transdisciplinary research. The Support Program for Research Universities continues to enhance research excellence within higher education. Currently, 23 universities hold research university status, with further investments being made to scale their capacity for innovation and industry collaboration. Policy discussions also centre on optimising the management and sustainability of Certified Research Infrastructures under Law No. 6550 (Türkiye’s Research Infrastructures Law - TRIL). This law supports research infrastructures in strategic areas such as nanotechnology, genomics, renewable energy, and astrophysics, ensuring 24/7 accessibility, industry cooperation, and performance-based evaluation. Both 6550 Law and CoHE promote internationalisation in public research. CoHE released an “Internationalisation in Higher Education Strategy (2024-2028)”. Lastly, recent debates focus on open science and open data initiatives in Türkiye. One of the initiatives is TÜBİTAK’s Open Science Policy that covers the management, storage, archiving, curation and digital preservation of the publications and the research data originated from the projects which have been carried out or supported by TÜBİTAK. |
| Ukraine | Russia’s war of aggression has inflicted severe damage on Ukraine’s research sector, with 1,458 buildings across 180 research and higher education institutions damaged or destroyed. This conflict has also resulted in the loss of over 750 units of scientific equipment, 643 of which are beyond repair. The war has significantly disrupted cooperation and access to research infrastructure, particularly affecting institutions in active combat zones or occupied territories, forcing many to relocate. In response to these challenges, on June 6, 2024, Ukraine's parliament adopted, in the first reading, Bill No. 10218. This legislation introduces provisions to ensure the effective functioning, accessibility, and joint use of research infrastructure, as well as support for young scientists. Ukraine has undertaken key measures to restore and develop its research infrastructure. The Ministry of Education and Science (MES) and the National Research Foundation of Ukraine (NRFU) held calls to support research and infrastructure projects. Furthermore, 19 Centres for Joint Research Equipment Use were established to safeguard research processes during blackouts and enhance technical capacity. Additionally, the MES initiated the creation of the International Coalition for Supporting Science, Research, and Innovation in Ukraine (R&I Coalition) to mobilise global efforts for restoring Ukraine’s research and innovation infrastructure. Ukraine is actively implementing the principles of Open Science in its scientific policy, adhering to the guidelines set by the European Union. The next policy steps for advancing Open Science in Ukraine include amending relevant laws to align them with Open Science principles, including OECD recommendations. This will involve the introduction of a professional standard and training courses for data stewards, as well as the development of Open Science infrastructure, including research data repositories. Ukraine's system for assessing research institutions underwent significant reform in 2024, with the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine introducing a new methodology that emphasises both quantitative and qualitative evaluation. This system integrates global best practices, such as elements of the UK's Research Excellence Framework (REF), to ensure comprehensive and transparent assessments. The reformed state assessment evaluates research institutions based on their contribution to different spheres, including world-class scientific results, economic and social development, and national defense capabilities. The assessment combines measurable quantitative indicators with qualitative expert evaluations, making it both data-driven and context-sensitive. Each institution's impact is reviewed by three experts - two Ukrainian experts and one foreign. The reformed assessment system for research institutions in Ukraine represents a significant step forward in modernising the country’s research landscape. By combining rigorous quantitative metrics with expert evaluations and introducing performance-based management principles, Ukraine seeks to boost the impact of its research institutions on both national and global levels. These reforms also underline the country's commitment to transparency, accountability, and alignment with international best practices. To enhance transparency and efficiency of the basic funding allocation, the MES is developing a new order for the basic funding distribution dedicated to the main activities of state research institutions, and research, scientific and technical (experimental) development of higher education institutions based on the results of state assessment of such institutions. To enhance transparency and efficiency of the competitive funding allocation, the MES has developed and submitted for approval by the Government relevant amendments to the Order for the Use of Funds of the National Research Foundation of Ukraine and the Order for Competitive Selection and Financing of Projects by the National Research Foundation of Ukraine. |
| United Kingdom | The UK government has committed to delivering change and improving the lives of citizens across the nation. This ambitious goal hinges on unlocking the full potential of UK science and technology to stimulate growth, create jobs, and ensure that all citizens enjoy healthy, secure, and sustainable lives. By strategically investing in the public research system, the UK aims to maintain its competitive edge, enhance collaboration with international partners, and ensure that the benefits of cutting-edge technologies and scientific advancements are widely distributed across society. According to the OECD, UK gross domestic spending on R&D was 2.8% of GDP in 2022 data. As announced in June 2025, the UK government will invest more than £22.5 billion a year in R&D by 2029/30. Over the Spending Review, the government will invest more than £86 billion to fund everything from new drug treatments and longer lasting batteries to new AI breakthroughs to generate billions for the UK economy and drive the government’s Plan for Change. Total government R&D will grow by 10.9% in cash terms (2.9% real, translating into average annual real growth of 0.7%), with an increased focus on the government’s priorities, including the Industrial Strategy. With the rapid pace of modern technological and scientific development, we must have an integrated, systems-level approach to science and technology policy across the whole of government if we are to succeed. Individual public investments in research and development (R&D) should be strategically aligned and integrated with private sector investments to form a complementary portfolio. This approach is crucial for maximizing the impact of R&D on the real world, which is essential for economic growth. A well-coordinated public and private investment strategy in R&D can lead to significant advancements in technology and science, directly contributing to societal well-being. Through the Spending Review process, the UK government is working to ensure that R&D investment supports the aims and objectives of the UK’s National Missions and the 8 growth-driving sectors of the Industrial Strategy. Moreover, world-class national and international infrastructure delivers both scientific and societal benefits. The government is actively engaging with stakeholders, including infrastructure managers and organisations, UKRI’s Infrastructure Advisory Committee, the Advisory Group for Digital Research Infrastructure, and the wider research community, to optimize the delivery of government priorities throughout the entire lifecycle of infrastructure projects. This collaboration is key to ensuring that infrastructure projects not only meet scientific needs but also address broader societal challenges. The government is working to understand technological dependencies and opportunities for convergence to maximise the impact of these investments, for example, using artificial intelligence and engineering biology in the development of personalised medicines. The government is also pursuing opportunities to improve researcher data access, learning from our £5 million pilot programme with UKRI, and launching a National Data Library to provide simple, secure and ethical access to key public data assets. |