The European Union’s Digital Omnibus proposal includes a pivotal new definition of "scientific research" within the GDPR, marking the first time the term is codified and potentially influencing numerous areas of law and innovation across the region.
- New GDPR article proposes defining 'scientific research' for the first time.
- EU lawmakers differ on inclusion of commercial and AI-related research.
- Definition could influence future EU copyright, AI, and research policies.
What happened
The European Commission introduced a proposal in November 2025 to embed a definition of "scientific research" directly into the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This initiative is being jointly reviewed by the European Parliament’s Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) and Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committees, with notable input from rapporteurs Aura Salla and Marina Kaljurand. While the initial proposal has largely been maintained in recent drafts, differing definitions have emerged from key members: one aligned with the OECD R&D model including commercial interests, and another limiting research to autonomous, public-interest endeavors.
The proposal comes amid wider EU efforts to harmonize legislation across domains such as copyright and the evolving European Research Area Act. This formalized definition has far-reaching implications, especially for stakeholders like universities and research organizations, who rely on it to determine the applicability of GDPR provisions related to research activities and data protection obligations.
Why it matters
The absence of a statutory definition of scientific research in the EU has left regulatory and judicial bodies to interpret the term on a case-by-case basis, creating legal uncertainty for researchers and institutions. Embedding a clear definition within GDPR can offer stronger legal clarity and potentially recalibrate obligations related to data handling within research contexts. This clarity is crucial at a time when digital rights and data privacy remain hotly contested, with concerns among some lawmakers about potential relaxation of protections if research definitions are broadened.
The debate also highlights an emerging tension over artificial intelligence (AI): some amendments advocate explicitly including AI development, training, and testing within scientific research, while others seek to exclude AI activities entirely. This dichotomy contrasts with EU strategies aiming to position Europe as a global AI research hub, supported by substantial funding initiatives exceeding one billion euros and the launch of specialized AI science institutes.
What to watch next
EU parliamentarians must navigate a complex amendment process to reconcile competing views on the research definition, including differing stances on commercial involvement and artificial intelligence. The final provision will influence not only GDPR compliance frameworks but also other critical legislative areas like copyright exceptions for text and data mining, and the European Research Area Act.
Stakeholders in academia, industry, and civil society will be closely monitoring these developments, as the definition’s scope could determine access to data, research freedoms, and the regulatory treatment of emerging technologies. The outcome may also signal how the EU balances innovation and data privacy protections in its broader digital policy landscape.