This article examines how de-risking policy instruments interact to shape implementation conditions for Sino-research collaboration in Danish, Norwegian and Swedish higher education institutions (HEIs). Using comparative policy analysis, it analyses how instruments combine across types, functions and actor loci, and what these interactions mean for HEIs. The findings show that implementation conditions are shaped less by individual instruments than by broader governance arrangements. Across the three cases, nodal instruments like guidelines depended on organisational settings to be reinforced, with different consequences for institutional practice. Denmark displays a reinforced, security-oriented mix that supports more coherent action among HEIs. Norway exhibits a layered mix that offers coordination support while preserving interpretive space. Sweden shows a less coordinated set of instruments that leaves HEIs with greater interpretive space but less coherent national guidance. The article shows that the actor loci behind nodal and organisational instruments matter. Policy mixes anchored more closely in security-oriented state structures appear more protection-oriented, while mixes mediated through higher education sector actors preserve more room for collaboration-oriented logics. The article contributes to research on policy instrument mixes, research security and higher education governance by showing that de-risking is an interactive governance arrangement rather than a set of isolated instruments.
Lundin et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: