Adapting the legal framework of public–private partnerships to the needs of science

Abstract

Problem setting. The development of scientific and R&D activity requires substantial resources, especially for research infrastructure. Given fiscal constraints, state–business cooperation becomes salient. Law No. 4510-IX, which updates the PPP framework, creates preconditions for mobilising private investment in education, science and R&D. However, the specific characteristics of this sector, including uncertain research outcomes, long project cycles, and indirect economic returns, make it difficult to apply general PPP rules directly. This paper examines the adaptability of Law No. 4510-IX to PPPs in science, particularly for research infrastructure. Analysis of recent research and publications. Ukrainian scholarship has addressed PPP law and research infrastructures, yet the legislative novelties necessitate reassessment of PPP use in science/R&D, with emphasis on infrastructure development. Purpose of research. To identify legal factors that hinder PPP application in science and R&D. Article’s main body. The paper reviews Law No. 4510-IX (19.06.2025) and its enhancements to PPP mechanisms. It finds that, despite progress, implementation in science/R&D remains insufficiently regulated. Concerns include drafting technique, terminological inconsistency (“private investor” vs “private partner”), and limited attention to sector specificity. Current effectiveness analysis is overly finance-centric and underweights R&D performance metrics. The paper argues for phased implementation with interim performance reviews and for integrating research-relevant KPIs. It also highlights obstacles posed by confining PPPs to innovation enterprises only within higher-education institutions, thereby narrowing opportunities for broader research and innovation infrastructure. Three legislative options are proposed: (a) remove excessive limits from the Education Law; (b) detail PPP features in special statutes (e.g., Science Parks, Industrial Parks); or (c) insert a general article on science/R&D PPPs into Section VIII of the PPP Law. Conclusions and prospects for development. Law No. 4510-IX expands PPP scope and modernizes the instrument, yet issues persist: drafting, terminology, and insufficient sectoral tailoring. The paper substantiates the need to move beyond finance-centric indicators and legally embed research-technical metrics (publications/patents, trained personnel, shared-equipment beamtime, etc.). It proposes a phased PPP procedure with interim performance checks, drawing on EU practice (EIT KICs). It identifies “private partner” vs “private investor” inconsistency and the narrow focus of Article 81 of the Education Law. Three improvement paths are outlined; the preferred option is a general science/R&D PPP clause in Section VIII of the PPP Law to secure systematic and flexible regulation.