Research Security Policies: An Overview (CRS Report for Congress)
| Release Date |
Revised Dec. 4, 2024 |
| Report Number |
IF12589 |
| Report Type |
In Focus |
| Authors |
Emily G. Blevins; Marcy E. Gallo |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Feb. 8, 2024 (3 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
The international scientific community generally views the
free and open exchange of information as vital to the
process of scientific inquiry, including the vetting of ideas
and the verification of research results. The U.S. research
ecosystem broadly operates on these principles. U.S.
officials and others have raised concerns about various
efforts of foreign governments—most notably the People’s
Republic of China—to influence and exploit the openness
of the U.S. research ecosystem. The acquisition of U.S.
advances in science and technology, intellectual property,
and talent by strategic competitors may pose a risk to U.S.
national defense and global economic competitiveness.
Congress and the executive branch have taken several
actions intended to maintain the benefits of an open
research ecosystem while protecting it from external
threats. For example, in 2019, Section 1746 of the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2020
(P.L. 116-92) directed federal agencies, among other things,
to develop descriptions of known and potential threats to
federally funded research and development (R&D) and to
the integrity of the U.S. scientific enterprise. In January
2021, President Trump issued National Security
Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33), which
“direct[ed] action to strengthen protections of United States
Government-supported [R&D] against foreign government
interference and exploitation.” And in January 2022, the
Biden Administration issued guidance to federal agencies
on the implementation of NSPM-33.
This In Focus summarizes key developments in four
selected research security policy areas—disclosure
requirements; foreign talent recruitment programs; research
security training and program requirements; and
information sharing and risk assessment—and poses
potential oversight questions for Congress to consider.
