3 Key Insights - ITER's Knowledge Transfer Mechanisms
3 Key Insights - ITER's Knowledge Transfer Mechanisms
May 15, 2026
Q&A with Dr Melanie Windridge, Laban Coblentz, Alain Becoulet and Oliver Hoenen
1. From delay to dialogue — engaging the industry by aligning on the baseline, not the timeline
ITER’s push on knowledge transfer has been shaped by a shift in reality. As timelines for first plasma evolved and a new baseline was established, the organisation was forced to reconsider not only delivery, but how knowledge should be shared across the fusion ecosystem.
Earlier expectations assumed a sequential model — ITER first, industry later. That assumption no longer holds.
“We thought knowledge transfer occurs in sequence… you build ITER, then you transfer knowledge. The reality has emerged in a much different way.” — Laban Laban
Instead, ITER has moved towards enabling parallel development — sharing knowledge earlier, while the machine is still being built. The private-public workshop itself is a direct outcome of this shift, originating from the need to demonstrate continued value following delays and a revised programme baseline.
At the same time, this is being formalised through structures such as the International Tokamak Physics and Engineering Activity (ITPEA) which is expanding from physics into engineering and gradually opening participation to private companies.
This technical challenge has become an opportunity to strengthen links with industry, while shifting knowledge transfer into the development phase today, rather than treating it as a retrospective exercise.
2. From knowledge transfer to shared ecosystem — collaboration in practice
As private fusion has scaled, the focus has shifted from simply transferring knowledge to building a more integrated ecosystem of collaboration.
In practice, ITER is engaging more directly with the work being carried out by private companies. Collaboration with companies such as TAE highlights this dynamic, particularly in areas like neutral beam development, where ITER is drawing on external technical progress alongside its own.
On the digital side, ITER’s Integrated Modelling & Analysis Suite (IMAS) reflects a more structured form of collaboration. Rather than acting purely as a repository of internal tools, it is being positioned as shared infrastructure for the wider fusion community:
“This can serve as an ecosystem… to improve collectively the quality of our simulation software.” — Olivier Hoenen
By opening these tools, ITER enables external developers — including private companies — to contribute directly to improving models, validation, and simulation quality.
Beyond software, ITER has already shared more than 10,000 documents and continues to offer consultations and tailored site visits.
“It’s not simply you collecting the knowledge… but also bringing to this community the results of your experiment, of your failures and others.” — Alain Bécoulet
Taken together, these mechanisms point to a broader shift: from a model of knowledge transfer to one of ongoing collaboration, where public and private actors are increasingly working within a shared technical ecosystem to learn from one another.
3. Accessing ITER’s knowledge — structured, but not frictionless
While access to ITER’s knowledge is expanding, it remains structured and mediated.
The primary route for companies is through ITER Member Domestic Agencies (DAs), which act as the formal interface for engagement.
“A company should be nominated by a member… we like to have our domestic agencies in the loop.” — Alain Bécoulet
In practice, this means companies must define specific technical needs — whether in magnets, cryogenics, or simulation — and work through national channels to access relevant knowledge, subject to IP and ownership constraints.
Alongside this, more accessible pathways are emerging:
- open-source software via IMAS,
- public reports and handbooks,
- and forthcoming catalogues of supply chain, facilities, and expertise.
However, the structure reflects ITER’s multinational governance — and with that comes complexity and, at times, slower processes.
The workshop underscored the value of closer engagement between public and private fusion efforts, but also the practical realities of how that engagement works in practice.
As one audience member noted:
“If someone has to build a magnet test facility… and they knew they could use ITER’s resources… that might materially affect their trajectory.” — Audience member
Access to ITER’s knowledge and infrastructure can be highly valuable, but it is not always immediate or straightforward. For companies — particularly smaller players — engagement is best approached alongside continued independent development, rather than as a critical dependency.
ITER is opening up — but within the constraints of its structure. Understanding how to navigate this will be key to making the most of what it offers.