Challenge
Europe invests in research computing and data infrastructure through several routes: EuroHPC JU is the principal EC-level channel for compute capacity; EOSC coordinates the federated data-services layer; the bulk of operational HTC, cloud and storage capacity is funded through national programmes and the thematic research infrastructures themselves; Horizon Europe (and successor FP10) work-programme lines support development and integration projects. Yet these investments face a structural challenge: computing and storage requirements are projected to grow by an order of magnitude by the 2030s, while EC-level capacity growth (channelled chiefly through EuroHPC and the AI Factories) is concentrated on exascale and AI-optimised systems, and national operational baselines that fund the bulk of HTC, storage and thematic-RI capacity are not projected to track the demand curve.
Moreover, researchers cannot easily use existing resources across organisational boundaries: the limiting factor is typically national or organisational funding eligibility rather than technical interoperability. EuroHPC and EOSC partially resolve this at EC level, but their access modes are not yet adapted to the long-running, data-heavy workflows characteristic of HEP and RA. A workflow requiring EuroHPC cycles, EGI federation services (which deliver capacity from national and thematic providers), and EOSC data repositories must navigate three separate governance structures, allocation processes, and authentication systems. This fragmentation reduces infrastructure utilisation and creates barriers that favour well-resourced teams over smaller research groups.
Three interconnected challenges prevent the compute and data continuum from functioning as coherent European capability:
- Governance fragmentation: Thematic research digital infrastructures (e.g. WLCG for HL-LHC, SRCNet for SKAO) and pan-European multi-disciplinary digital infrastructures (e.g. EuroHPC, EOSC, EGI) operate under different governance models with limited systematic coordination. Success stories exist: the long-standing cooperation between WLCG and EGI demonstrates that effective co-design is achievable. However, structured engagement between data-intensive science communities and EuroHPC remains underdeveloped. Wider coordination mechanisms would benefit all parties.
- Allocation cycle mismatch: Research infrastructures operate on multi-decade timelines (the LHC has been operational since 2008 and via the HL-LHC upgrade will run through 2041; SKA is foreseen to be operational for 50+ years from the start of operations), yet must navigate incompatible allocation models across the infrastructure landscape. Federated infrastructures like WLCG operate on pledged resources committed by national funding agencies, whilst EuroHPC centres use competitive peer-reviewed proposals typically granted for one year. Experiments need guaranteed access for 3-5 year periods compatible with their planning cycles, but no unified framework spans these different approaches. This creates planning uncertainty, repetitive submission burden, and discourages investment in workflow optimisation.
- Authentication fragmentation: federated digital infrastructures and HPC centres operate partially incompatible identity management systems. Lack of federated identity management and multi-factor authentication (MFA) barriers for unattended workflows prevent seamless authenticated access. Without this, technical interoperability alone provides no benefit to researchers.
Priorities Overview
Pillar 1 establishes governance, allocation, and trust foundations across both compute and data dimensions of the continuum. Three priorities form a layered intervention: governance coordination (P01) creates the institutional basis for allocation agreements (P02), which in turn require authenticated identity (P03) to track usage and enforce entitlements.
P01: Cross-Infrastructure Governance. Establish a coordination forum enabling thematic research digital infrastructures (e.g. WLCG, SRCNet, LOFAR ERIC) to align positions and seek formal representation within pan-European multi-disciplinary digital infrastructures (EuroHPC, EOSC, EGI), with policy-maker representation from national funding agencies and relevant EC units. The forum addresses interoperability across legal, organisational, semantic, and technical layers, coordinates an innovation agenda for data-intensive science distinct from classical HPC optimisation, and develops policy recommendations bridging operational versus project-based funding. National programmes provide the majority of HTC, cloud, and thematic-RI storage capacity, while the EC channel via EuroHPC concentrates on exascale and AI-optimised compute; this division of labour is deliberate, not legacy, and the strategic question is alignment across the two funding streams (consistent with the forthcoming ERA Act framework), not migration of one into the other. (Detail: Annex A, P01)
P02: Federated Resource Allocation. Establish multi-year allocation mechanisms aligned with timelines on which research facilities evolve, supported by standardised, transparent accounting frameworks for heterogeneous resources (CPU, GPU, storage, network) across governance boundaries. Existing models demonstrate feasibility: WLCG enables 5-10 year resource planning through national commitments, and EuroHPC's Strategic Access designation provides a pathway for enabling guaranteed multi-year allocations at the EU-level. Funding bodies can quantify return on investment through standardised accounting metrics tied to multi-year allocation checkpoints, addressing the operational-versus-project funding mismatch that currently undermines long-term scientific programmes and their societal impact. (Detail: Annex A, P02)
P03: Federated Identity and Trust. Deploy federated authentication enabling researchers to access infrastructure across organisational boundaries, with dynamic authorisation, automated delegation, and service-account support for long-running and unattended scientific workflows. The major community and federation AAI proxies, including Indigo-IAM (WLCG, SRCNet), EGI Check-in (EGI), MyAccessID (EuroHPC, EOSC, GEANT) are already AARC-BPA-compliant and accept eduGAIN identities; the integration challenge is interoperation across these proxies (attribute mapping, group and role assertion handling, IdP discovery), together with bridging to site-local SSO systems (e.g. CERN-SSO) for resources under separate authorisation domains. Adopt the AARC BPA as the architectural baseline, contribute to AARC-TREE work on cross-proxy attribute exchange, and make collaborative and service-account operation a first-class capability with delegation patterns that displace the single-person MFA workaround for unattended workflows (Detail: Annex A, P03).
Interdependencies: the three priorities are mutually load-bearing. Allocation (P02) cannot operate without governance agreements (P01) to legitimise cross-boundary use, and depends on federated identity (P03) to attribute usage; trust frameworks (P03) require P01 to gain currency outside their home organisation; and P01's coordination work becomes operationally meaningful only when P02 and P03 are in place.
Recommendations
For Scientific Communities and Research Infrastructures
- Seek formal representation in horizontal e-Infrastructure advisory structures to ensure scientific requirements shape infrastructure decisions (P01)
- Publish multi-year resource plans aligned with experimental timelines to inform infrastructure planning (P02)
- Adopt federated identity frameworks enabling seamless access across infrastructure boundaries (P03)
For e-Infrastructures and Service Providers
- Establish liaison mechanisms with thematic research infrastructure governance bodies to ensure scientific requirements shape infrastructure decisions (P01)
- Technically implement multi-year allocation frameworks providing planning certainty for data intensive research facilities beyond annual cycles (P02)
- Deploy AARC Blueprint Architecture for federated authentication supporting unattended workflows (P03)
For Policy Makers and Funding Bodies
- Recognise data-intensive research infrastructures which their long-term needs for digital infrastructure as an important stakeholder category in EuroHPC and EOSC governance (P01)
- Fund coordination mechanisms bridging thematic and horizontal infrastructure governance (P01)
- Enable strategic (multi-year) access designations aligning allocation cycles with the planning horizons for data-intensive research facilities (P02)
- Support trust framework harmonisation enabling federated authentication across European digital Infrastructures and national centres (P03)