Vitaliy Omelyanenko , Pavel Gol'din , Oleksiy Kolezhuk , Anna Vorontsova , Svitlana Tarasenko
Ukraine’s research system is currently operating under unprecedented strain caused by war, large-scale destruction, depopulation, and economic constraints. Under these circumstances, conventional approaches to research priority-setting cannot be fully applied and must be adapted to unforeseen changes and challenges.
At the core of this White Paper is a question of critical importance to public policy: how can strategic research priorities be set during existential crises in a way that responds to immediate societal needs while preserving long-term national resilience, research capacity, and the country’s ability to develop?
The Ukrainian context encompasses a protracted war and profound uncertainty, the needs of post-war reconstruction, the demographic consequences of depopulation, rapid technological and environmental change, and the strategic course towards European integration, which entails the development of mission-oriented innovation and competitiveness.
The study focuses specifically on research priority-setting, reflecting the distinction between research and innovation processes in Ukrainian legislation and public policy.
Drawing on a comparative analysis of countries that have experienced war, prolonged security threats, post-war reconstruction, or systemic transformation, the authors propose a four-stage model demonstrating how the objectives of research and innovation policy evolve from ensuring security and survival, through post-war reconstruction and innovation-driven competitiveness, to long-term societal resilience.
The proposed two-tier priority-setting framework combines international multi-criteria assessment practices with EU foresight approaches. At the first tier, research areas are mapped against national grand challenges or opportunities. At the second tier, each research area is assessed using six quantitative indicators: strategic significance for national defence and dual-use potential; economic and recovery impact; social impact, including effects on quality of life and social cohesion; the readiness of existing human capital and research teams; implementation feasibility; and alignment with EU priorities.
The potential international partners identified include Estonia, Finland, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands, which have relevant experience in digital transformation, mission-oriented innovation, reconstruction, and research excellence.
The process is expected to identify 40–60 priority research areas. The roadmaps for each mission should outline realistic implementation plans through 2035, funding opportunities, including EU co-funding, risk assessments, indicators, and institutional mechanisms. They should also provide for quality control, post-project monitoring, regular review, and the possible adjustment of priorities.
The proposed framework provides Ukraine with a flexible approach to setting research priorities under crisis conditions, supports the modernisation of the national research system, improves the efficiency of resource use, and aligns research policy with European practices during wartime and throughout post-war reconstruction.