International Legal Regulation of Scientific Activity: Current Challenges and Research Approaches
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/jiel.2026.1.17-28Keywords:
international legal approaches to the regulation of scientific activity, adaptation in the field of scientific research, European regulatory frameworks for scientific activity, case law of the European Court of Human Rights concerning freedom of scientific activity, practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union, international legal instruments in the field of scientific activity, international scientific cooperationAbstract
The article examines contemporary approaches to the international legal regulation of scientific activity in the context of globalisation, digital transformation, and technological development. It is established that scientific research has become an important factor influencing international relations, economic development, human rights protection, and global security, which requires effective international legal mechanisms for regulating cooperation between states, scientific institutions, and international organisations. International legal regulation performs not only a coordinating role but also ensures the protection of academic freedom, ethical standards, and the balance between scientific progress and public interests.
The study demonstrates that the regulation of scientific activity is based on a combination of treaty norms, soft law instruments, ethical principles, and institutional recommendations developed by organisations such as UNESCO, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the European Union. Yet the absence of unified international standards leads to inconsistencies in the implementation of legal norms at the national level.
Special attention is given to challenges affecting academic freedom, including political pressure, armed conflicts, information manipulation, and restrictions on international scientific cooperation. The article also analyses the influence of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and digital technologies on the transformation of international legal approaches to scientific regulation. It is emphasised that technological progress calls for the development of updated legal standards on liability, data protection, transparency, and ethical governance in scientific research.
The research concludes that strengthening scientific integrity, harmonising international legal standards, and improving institutional cooperation are essential for building an effective and adaptive international framework capable of responding to contemporary global challenges in the field of scientific activity.
References
1. Bortniak, K. V. (2024). Administratyvno-pravovi zasady kontrolno-nahliadovoi diialnosti v sferi nauky [Administrative and legal principles of control and supervisory activity in the field of science]. Samit-Knyha.
2. Karvatska, S. B. (2024). Pravova rehlamentatsiia naukovoi diialnosti: suchasni vyklyky ta doslidnytski pidkhody [Legal regulation of scientific activity: Modern challenges and research approaches]. Yurydychnyi Naukovyi Elektronnyi Zhurnal, (12), 528–531. http://www.lsej.org.ua/12_2024/125.pdf
3. Tytska, Ya. O. (2024). Mizhnarodne pravo ta vidobrazhennia katehorii naukovoho poshuku u vitchyznianii doktryni [International law and the reflection of categories of scientific research in domestic doctrine]. Yurydychnyi Naukovyi Elektronnyi Zhurnal, (12). https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0374/2024-12/106
4. Akbari, A., Pourghahramani, B., & Beigi, J. (2024). Scientific discrimination and apartheid: Current international law approach and existing challenges. International Studies Journal, 20(3), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.22034/isj.2023.386710.1975
5. Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, Applications Nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24960/15 (European Court of Human Rights, May 25, 2021). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
6. Çölgeçen and Others v. Turkey, Application No. 50124/07 (European Court of Human Rights, December 8, 2020). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
7. Kula v. Turkey, Application No. 20233/06 (European Court of Human Rights, June 19, 2018). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
8. Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, Application No. 39128/05 (European Court of Human Rights, October 20, 2009). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
9. Mustafa Erdoğan and Others v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 346/04 and 39779/04 (European Court of Human Rights, May 27, 2014). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
10. Sorguç v. Turkey, Application No. 17089/03 (European Court of Human Rights, June 23, 2009). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
11. UNESCO. (1960). Convention against Discrimination in Education. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-against-discrimination-education
12. Council of Europe. (1950). Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
13. UNESCO. (1989). Convention on Technical and Vocational Education. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-technical-and-vocational-education
14. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child
15. Data Protection Commissioner v. Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems (Case C-311/18) (Court of Justice of the European Union, July 16, 2020). https://curia.europa.eu
16. Garnett, K., Van Calster, G., & Reins, L. (2018). Towards an innovation principle: An industry trump or shortening the odds on environmental protection? Law, Innovation and Technology, 10(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2018.1455023
17. United Nations. (1965). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-convention-elimination-all-forms-racial
18. United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-cultural-rights
19. Kovács, K. (2024). Academic freedom in Europe: Limitations and judicial remedies. Global Constitutionalism, 14(1), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1017/S204538172400009
20. Mahalatchimy, A., Lau, P. L., Li, P., & Flear, M. L. (2021). Framing and legitimating EU legal regulation of human gene-editing technologies: Key facets and functions of an imaginary. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa080
21. OECD. (2021). OECD Recommendation on Access to Research Data from Public Funding. https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0347
22. UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137
23. European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
24. UNESCO. (2000). The Dakar Framework for Action: Education for All: Meeting Our Collective Commitments. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000121147
25. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
26. UNESCO. (2021). UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379949
27. UNESCO. (2017). UNESCO Recommendation on Science and Scientific Researchers. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000263618
28. United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
29. Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights. (1981). https://www.alhewar.com/ISLAMDECL.html
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
