Why Governments Must Sound the Alarm on Research Security and Fast

In April 2024, officials from China reportedly threatened staff at a UK university to shut down a research project, a chilling example of how state actors may interfere with academic work. Yet despite incidents like this, much of academia remains complacent, treating research security as a box-ticking exercise. In this post, we explore why that needs to change, and how a shift in government strategy and academic culture could help protect vital research.

The Real Threat: When Research Becomes a Target

The troubling case at Sheffield Hallam University, where foreign officials not only threatened personnel but also attempted to breach digital infrastructure and join online meetings without permission, shows just how far state actors may go to influence or disrupt academic research.

Such incidents, though shocking, are rarely made public. Institutional sensitivities and government reticence mean that many “near-misses” remain hidden, making it difficult for the broader public, or even academics, to understand the scope of the problem.

Because of this underreporting, there is a persistent gap in perceptions between security experts, who see explicit and growing threats, and many in academia, who believe their work is safe.

The Perception Gap: Why Academics May Underestimate Risk

A recent analysis found that only a minority of academics consider their research to be under serious threat. Comforting rationales like “if it’s not nuclear-level research, the risk is negligible” still circulate. One security practitioner described common refrains this way:

“I’d be happy if the North Koreans stole my research,” or “Yes, I take my work phone to China, but you take a risk travelling anywhere.” 

This kind of attitude, dismissing risk as remote or overblown, helps maintain the illusion that research security is relevant only to a few. Meanwhile, some universities respond by setting up research-security teams, but locating them within compliance or admin departments risks reducing security to a bureaucratic process rather than embedding it in research culture.

Cultural Change: What Research Security Should Look Like

In specific academic fields, such as nuclear science, researchers are already familiar with the need for stringent protocols covering cyber, physical, and personnel security. However, in our increasingly "contested world," where many scientific domains, from biotechnology to artificial intelligence, may carry dual-use implications, this security mindset must extend beyond traditional "security-sensitive" disciplines. All researchers, regardless of their specific field, need to adopt a "security-aware" mindset. This requires them to think carefully about what data they share and with whom, to assess the security implications of collaborations (especially international ones), and to recognize that even seemingly harmless research could be exploited or targeted. Without this fundamental cultural shift, research security efforts will remain superficial and reactive.

A Strategic Response: What Government Policy Should Do Differently

The UK government's preparation of its first UK Research Security Strategy is a positive step, but for the strategy to genuinely overcome passivity, it must move beyond broad statements. Specifically, universities receiving public funding, particularly those specializing in sensitive or dual-use areas, should be required to demonstrate a strong, well-resourced commitment to security as a condition for support. Furthermore, senior leadership must take ownership of research security rather than delegate it to junior compliance officers. To effectively resonate with the wider academic community, the strategy should use real-world, specific security failure examples to illustrate the tangible risks vividly. Ultimately, the analysis suggests the strategy needs to deliver a wake-up call, rather than simply checking regulatory boxes.

Conclusion & Call to Action

The security breach at Sheffield Hallam University should serve as a warning for universities, governments, and researchers everywhere. The stakes are too high: intellectual assets, national security interests, and public trust in science all hang in the balance.

We must demand more than compliance; we must insist on a cultural transformation. Universities need to embed “security-conscious research” into their core values. Governments must craft strategies that are vivid, hard-hitting, and backed by leadership commitment.

Call to action: If you’re a researcher, university leader, or policymaker, start asking directly: Does our institution take research security seriously enough? If not, push for transparency, accountability, and real-world examples.

Only then will research security evolve from a bureaucratic afterthought into a core pillar of responsible scholarship.

Source: The Government Needs to Send a Wake-Up Call on Research Security