It is undesirable to screen scientists who come from outside the EU to conduct research in the Netherlands based on their field of expertise for possible risks to ‘knowledge security’.
This is stated by a committee of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW). in an opinion “emphatically” about a proposed Knowledge Security Screening Act, which (now outgoing) Minister Dijkgraaf (Education, Culture and Science, D66) wants to publish soon.
The law should make it possible to screen researchers from outside the European Union for security risks and to refuse them if they do not meet the security requirements. The minister hopes to prevent sensitive scientific information from ‘leaking’ or states from putting pressure on academic freedom through interference.
Risk of discrimination
According to the Academy, such a measure is too harsh, will be impractical and also entails the risk of discrimination. “Awareness of safety risks is important, and this can be improved,” says KNAW president Marileen Dogterom in an explanation. “But you have to look for the right balance between risks and the principle of open science. The committee makes a nuanced contribution to this.”
In the advice, the KNAW praises the approach to making universities more aware of ‘knowledge security’ in a broad sense. This not only involves the risks of leaking or misuse of knowledge by third parties, but also ethical dilemmas in academic practice. Last year the ministry already came up with one Knowledge Safety Guidelinesdrawn up in consultation with the academic community, to teach institutions to recognize dangers.
However, a screening of ‘third country nationals’, researchers from countries outside the European Union, goes too far for the KNAW. This would be “not sufficiently fine-grained” and could lead to “false security” because knowledge can also leak through other forms of academic exchange and cooperation to which the law does not apply. The Academy also doubts the feasibility of screening by a new organization that would have to process large numbers of applications in many areas.
Instead, the KNAW advocates ‘customization’ at universities in four academic domains with their own expertise: technology, science, medical and health sciences and social sciences and humanities. “It is important to keep these considerations as close as possible to the shop floor, to the expertise of the various disciplines themselves,” says Dogterom.
Military applications
In the critical advice, the Academy also comments on the general term ‘knowledge security’, which is at the same time too narrow and too broad. In practice he refers in particular to ‘dual use‘-applications of research, for example military, and on economic interests. But the term is inadequate for ethical dilemmas and integrity issues. The committee points out the risk of ‘securitization’ of knowledge issues.
Attention to knowledge security has increased significantly in recent years, with concerns about collaboration with researchers and institutions from countries with authoritarian regimes. Countries such as China and Saudi Arabia invest large sums of money in boosting their status in the scientific world. The Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam closed a China center last year when it turned out that it was fueled by Chinese subsidies.
Minister Dijkgraaf wants to publish the bill for internet consultation this autumn and hopes that the law can enter into force in early 2025.