Big pieces of scientific kit aren't getting any cheaper. Neutron sources, synchrotrons, telescopes and particle accelerators all require highly trained staff and lots of consumables. They need to be upgraded periodically for research to march forward, and the next generation must be even bigger and more ambitious.

In the current fiscal environment, just keeping the lights on can be a struggle, but Europe's facilities are finding a way. As we report on page 295, they have begun inviting non-European countries to join them. The decision is driven by short-term need, but the continent's organizations may also be positioning themselves for an era of scientific supremacy over rivals such as the United States and Japan.

Europe understands the need for cooperation. Multinational labs bloomed throughout the second half of the twentieth century, a sign of both Europe's post-war unity and the fact that no single nation could afford the types of facility that were being built elsewhere in the world. Fast-forward 50 years, and bodies such as CERN, Europe's high-energy physics lab near Geneva, Switzerland, and the European Southern Observatory (ESO), based in Garching, Germany, are internationally recognized. They have built instruments that are among the best in the world, and they are training a generation of European scientists.

This year sees non-European members entering the fold for the first time. Last month, Israel became the first state from outside Europe to be represented on CERN's governing council, and ESO will soon admit Brazil. Other bodies, including some facilities now under construction, are partnering with countries such as India. Even national facilities are joining in: after years of cooperation, Italy's Elettra synchrotron light source near Trieste has partnered with India to build two beamlines.

This expansion attracts cash in the short term, but it also lays the groundwork for a more fruitful future. Organizations such as ESO and CERN will gain the best researchers from nations around the world, raising their status and the quality of their research. They will also strengthen the scientific base in their partner countries, increasing the chances that these nations will be politically willing and scientifically able to help with the next big project. In the United States and Japan, by contrast, large national facilities are run by powerful research agencies that are difficult to approach and poorly equipped to engage in major financial and material cooperation at home and abroad. They will lose out in future: the facilities of tomorrow will be so big and costly that only those who can cooperate will win.

Two examples show the strength of Europe's hand. The first is ITER, a multinational fusion experiment that is being built in southern France. ITER's ballooning budget is giving Europe headaches in the short term, but its long-term benefits to the continent's scientific and technical expertise are undeniable. The second project, the Square Kilometre Array radio telescope, will be not be located in Europe for scientific reasons, but European scientists have a central role in choosing where it will be built, and will figure prominently in its operation.

There are risks, of course: chiefly that Europe will cede some control of its own infrastructure to its new partners. But done properly, the shared benefits can keep Europe on the top of the world for decades.