Amid rising tensions between the United States and China, the two countries signed a bilateral science and technology agreement on December 13, 2024. The program was presented as a “renewal” of the 45-year-old agreement to encourage cooperation, but that may be misleading.
The amended agreement substantially limits the scope of the original agreement, limits the topics allowed to be jointly studied, closes down opportunities for cooperation and inserts a new dispute resolution mechanism.
This change is in line with growing global concern about research safety. Governments are concerned about international competitors gaining military or trade advantages or security secrets through cross-border scientific collaboration.
The European Union, Canada, Japan and the United States unveiled sweeping new measures within months of each other to protect sensitive research from foreign interference. But there’s a problem: Too much security can stifle the international cooperation that drives scientific progress.
As a policy analyst and public affairs professor, I research international cooperation in science and technology and its implications for public and foreign policy. I have monitored the increasingly close ties between the United States and China in the fields of science and technology. The relationship evolved from knowledge transfer to genuine cooperation and competition.
Now, as security provisions change this previously open relationship, an important question emerges: Can nations tighten research protections without reducing the openness that makes science work?
China’s dominance changed the global landscape
China’s growth in scientific publishing marks a dramatic shift in global research. In 1980, Chinese authors produced less than 2% of the research articles included in the Web of Science, a curated database of scholarly output. According to my calculations, it will claim 25% of Web of Science articles by 2023, overtaking the United States and ending its 75-year reign at the top, which began in 1948 when it overtook the United Kingdom. Had left.
In 1980, China had no patented inventions. By 2022, Chinese companies led the way in US patents issued to foreign companies, with 40,000 patents compared to less than 2,000 for UK companies. In many advanced areas of science and technology, China is at the world frontier, if not the leader.
Since 2013, China has been a top ally in science with the United States. Thousands of Chinese students and scholars have conducted joint research with American counterparts.
Most American policymakers who supported the signing of the 1979 bilateral agreement thought that science would liberalize China. Instead, China has used technology to exert autocratic control and build a stronger military with a view to regional power and global influence.
Leadership in science and technology wins wars and builds successful economies. China’s rising power, backed by a state-controlled government, is transforming global power. Unlike open societies where research is public and shared, China often keeps the work of its researchers secret while also taking Western technology through hacking, forced technology transfer and industrial espionage. It is because of these practices that many governments are now implementing strict security measures.
Nations respond
The FBI claims that China has stolen sensitive technologies and research data to enhance its defense capabilities. China’s initiative under the Trump administration sought to root out thieves and spies. The Biden administration did not allow pressure to build. The Chips and Science Act of 2022 requires the National Science Foundation to establish SECURE – a center to assist universities and small businesses in helping the research community make security-informed decisions. I am working with SECURE to evaluate the effectiveness of its mission.
Other advanced nations are also on alert. The EU is advising member states to boost security measures. Japan joined the United States in unveiling sweeping new measures to protect sensitive research from foreign interference and exploitation. European countries are increasingly talking about technological sovereignty as a way to avoid exploitation by China. Similarly, when China wants to cooperate, Asian countries are wary of its intentions.
Australia has been particularly vocal about the threat posed by China’s rise, but others have also issued warnings. The Netherlands released a policy for secure international cooperation. Sweden raised concerns when a study revealed how spies had exploited its universities.
Canada has created a Research Safety Center for public safety and, like the US, has established regionally dispersed advisors to provide direct assistance to universities and researchers. Canada now requires mandatory risk assessments for research partnerships involving sensitive technologies. Similar approaches are underway in Australia and the UK
Germany’s 2023 provisions establish compliance units and ethics committees to oversee safety-relevant research. They are tasked with advising researchers, mediating disputes, and evaluating the ethical and safety implications of research projects. The committees focus on implementing security measures, controlling access to sensitive data, and assessing potential misuse.
Japan’s 2021 policy requires researchers to disclose and regularly update information about their affiliations, funding sources – both domestic and international – and potential conflicts of interest. A cross-ministerial R&D management system is launching seminars and briefings to educate researchers and institutions on emerging risks and best practices for maintaining research security.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development maintains an ongoing database with over 206 research protection policy statements issued through 2022.
openness is decreasing
An emphasis on security can stifle the international cooperation that drives scientific progress. About 25% of all US scientific articles originate from international collaborations. Evidence shows that international engagement and openness produce high-impact research. The most distinguished scientists work across national borders.
Even more critically, science depends on the free flow of ideas and talent across borders. After the Cold War, scientific progress accelerated as borders opened. While national research output remained stagnant in recent years, international collaboration showed significant growth, reflecting the increasingly global nature of science.
The challenge for research institutions will be to implement these new requirements without creating an atmosphere of suspicion or alienation. Retrenchment across national borders could slow progress. There is a certain amount of risk inherent in scientific openness, but we are nearing the end of a global, collaborative era in science.
,Author: Caroline Wagner, Professor of Public Affairs, The Ohio State University)
,disclosure statement: Caroline Wagner receives funding from SECURE, a research security service funded by the National Science Foundation. SECURE is administered by the University of Washington)
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
