China’s Dominance in Global High-End Technology Research Sounds an “Alarm Bell” for the Western World

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), an international think tank focused on security, recently stated that through tracking defense, space, energy, and biotechnology, they have found that China holds an “astonishing lead” in 37 out of 44 key and emerging technologies globally.

Western countries are losing the global competition in terms of research output. The report states that Western democratic nations are losing the global technology race, including the race for scientific and research breakthroughs. It urges Western governments to increase research investment.

Surpassing the U.S.

This study, which tracked 44 research fields, found that the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) occupies the top two positions in most of these fields. These fields include military, aerospace, robotics, energy, environment, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, advanced materials, and quantum technology. In some areas, China is home to the world’s top ten research institutions, while the U.S. often ranks second-rate, despite leading in high-performance computing, quantum computing, small satellites, and vaccine research. Over the past five years, China has published 48.49% of the world’s research papers on advanced aviation engines, including hypersonic technology. In 2021, China unexpectedly achieved a breakthrough in hypersonic missiles. In fact, if China’s strong research capabilities had been recognized earlier, this breakthrough would have been acknowledged sooner and not considered a surprise.

Furthermore, China may dominate in ten areas, including synthetic biology, batteries, 5G, and nanomanufacturing. In synthetic biology alone, China’s research output accounts for one-third of all global research in that field. China’s impressive achievements are partly due to the benefits it has gained from Western scientific and technological research. 20% of China’s top researchers have been trained in the “Five Eyes” alliance, consisting of the US, the UK, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. They utilize knowledge acquired from overseas to strengthen their own research. According to The Wall Street Journal, in 2021, over 1,400 Chinese-born scientists who were trained in the U.S. returned to China, severing their academic or corporate ties with the U.S.. Part of the reason is China’s growing strength in cutting-edge research fields.

Although China’s research advantage has not yet translated into a technological advantage, it has laid the foundation for Beijing’s positioning itself as a world-leading technological power. In the fields of defense, security, and space research, China particularly dominates, and the high-impact research it produces is usually more than five times that of the U.S. and other closest competitors. In the long term, China’s leading position in scientific research means that the country will excel not only in current technological developments across almost all fields but also in future technologies that do not yet exist. Western democratic countries are losing ground in global technological competition, including the race for scientific and research breakthroughs, and must accelerate their pace to catch up.

/The report states that China has an advantage in multiple fields, including aerospace.

Urgent Need for Second-Tier Players to Enhance Their Capabilities

ASPI, an international think tank based in Canberra and primarily funded by the Australian government, recently stated that China and the U.S. are significantly ahead of other countries in the race for scientific research. The report suggests that India and the United Kingdom, ranked third and fourth respectively, lag behind in most research fields. Following them are South Korea and Germany. The disparities between the U.S. and China, and what is often referred to as the “second-tier” countries, including the UK, India, South Korea, Germany, and Australia, are quite evident. Australia, however, ranks among the top five in nine technological areas.

The report calls for Australia to quickly join forces with other democratic countries such as the U.S., the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Japan to compete with China and establish a dedicated technical analysis center focused on China. Considering Australia’s unique circumstances, possessing one of the largest lithium deposits globally and all the key minerals required for lithium battery production, the report provides targeted recommendations. These include leveraging Australia’s advantages by focusing on electric batteries, critical minerals, and harnessing its substantial lithium reserves and solar panel capabilities to solidify its position as a recognized leader in photovoltaic technology.

This report indeed sounds the “alarm” for Western democratic countries in the global technology arena. China is rapidly developing towards surpassing the West, causing concerns about its potential control over critical technology supply. It is time to abandon Western arrogance. The report urges global democratic nations to foster more collaboration, establish secure supply chains, swiftly promote strategic key technology advancements, implement visa scrutiny programs to prevent illegal technology transfers, and encourage research technology visas, along with changes in university and taxation systems to incentivize new technology. It also suggests creating sovereign wealth funds to allocate 0.5% to 0.7% of national income for risk investment, research, and scaling funds. After all, providing strategic funding for research in these interrelated key technologies can mitigate the risks of current technological monopolies.

To catch up, Western countries need an “upgrade in strategic key technology” that relies on deeper collaboration among allies and greater investments in research, talent, and commercialization. Governments must make room for new, larger, and more innovative policy ideas. Only then can the international community avoid a future dominated by one or two countries in emerging industries, and countries can sustain access to trustworthy and secure critical technology supply chains.

Is the research methodology correct?

The recommendations put forth in the report have been welcomed by universities and the technology sector. It is predictable given the current perception of China as a threat to Western societies and the evident technological gap between China and the West that governments of Western countries would increase their investments in technology development and research.

However, it is worth scrutinizing the methodology used to produce this report. Firstly, the scope of the research is limited to academic papers. Who is interested in writing and publicly publishing papers? Larger technology companies have research and development departments, but their goal is not to publish papers or engage in exchanges with competitors. On the contrary, significant advancements, breakthroughs, or innovative ideas are often withheld from publication to maintain a lead over competitors in the research field. Therefore, using published papers as a measure of technological development potential raises doubts.

Secondly, the research focuses primarily on English-language papers, omitting non-English papers from European countries, as well as Chinese-language publications. In any discipline, the most fundamental and basic papers are usually shared among researchers within the same country before reaching the level of international journals. Relying solely on English-language academic journals is evidently insufficient. However, given resource limitations, this may be acceptable. Nevertheless, the certainty of the results remains questionable.

Thirdly, the research findings indicate that academic papers from China outnumber those from advanced Western countries, regardless of the field. This can be interpreted differently. China has emphasized examinations for the past three thousand years, and publishing papers is considered a criterion for academic positions and status within universities and research institutions. Chinese scholars, on average, publish a significant number of papers, and there is also a higher level of mutual citation since they are acquainted with each other. Additionally, with a large population and a considerable number of participants engaged in research, it is expected that China would produce a greater quantity of papers in various fields compared to Western countries. However, the quality and impact of these papers are subject to debate.

Fourthly, the report claims that China holds a significant advantage in certain technological fields, such as engines (including supersonic flight). However, it is widely known that China has yet to develop large aircraft engines comparable to those from Europe and the U.S., and its engine maintenance and repair capabilities are also not at an international level. Therefore, it is challenging to believe that China poses an immediate threat to Europe and the U.S. in these areas.

In conclusion, the report presents a possibility that requires further in-depth research to fully understand the situation in China. Ultimately, the development and application of technology in society are not solely driven by university research. For example, Australia has conducted numerous highly creative and profound technological studies, but due to the small scale of our economy, we often need to bring these innovations to Europe and the U.S. for further development and implementation.

The Persistence of Western Strength and Eastern Weakness

Although the report of ASPI indicates that China is in a “leading” position in terms of citations of key scientific and technological papers, Beijing University’s Institute of State Governance Director, Yao Yang, pointed out in a recent lecture that the structure of East rising and West declining still remains a long-term reality. In other words, China still faces challenges in fully surpassing the West in the next 10 to 15 years, and the key is to focus on improving its own affairs. It is undeniable that China has significant advantages in terms of its system, market, and talent dividends. However, there is still a considerable gap between China and the United States in areas such as technological innovation, high-end manufacturing, financial services, higher education, critical core technologies, military power, and cultural influence. Overconfidence is not advisable.

In the context of the global transformation over the past century, the most crucial variable is the power balance among major countries, and economic strength is the most comprehensive and commonly used indicator to measure national power. Issues such as inflation and economic recession have become important themes in the current world economy, and the economic catching-up process of emerging and developing economies with developed economies continues. However, achieving catching-up in the short term will still face many difficulties and obstacles. Besides economic strength, developed economies still possess relative advantages in areas such as military, technology, finance, and currency. The coexistence of the “rise of the East and the decline of the West” and the “West strong, East weak” pattern will be one of the main characteristics of the future world order.

In a recent hearing of the The United States House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party, bipartisan lawmakers expressed concerns about China’s central position in global supply chains for various high-end industries, including the production of 85% of global electric vehicle batteries and the extraction of rare minerals. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Defense is concerned about its reliance on certain technologies used by its contractors that originate from China, as well as the integration of military-civilian dual-use technologies by the Chinese military and civilian industries. Against the backdrop of the “technology crisis” spreading in U.S. politics and the strict implementation of technology export controls on China, the speed of technological decoupling between the U.S. and China can only accelerate. Both the U.S. and China are facing losses brought about by this decoupling, although China’s losses may be greater at present. Whether China can maintain its current technological leadership position remains uncertain.

In the 21st century, scientific and technological advancements have an unprecedented impact on international affairs and the fate of nations. Actively developing science and technology and seizing the opportunities of a new round of technological revolution have become major areas of competition among countries worldwide. The research report by the Australian think tank undoubtedly delivers a meaningful lesson to Western democratic countries. The current strength of China should not be underestimated, and the era of viewing China’s technological development through old lenses is gone for good.