US-China tensions: What that means for science

It is a truth universally acknowledged that science is an increasingly collaborative effort. Yet, despite achieving breakthroughs in everything from climate change to medicine, the partnership between China and the US is under pressure thanks to rising geopolitical tensions, trade wars and security concerns, threatening to unravel decades of shared progress.

While some Western companies are continuing to invest in both countries when it comes to research and development, others have pulled back. AstraZeneca, for example, has recently committed $3.5 billion to expand its research and manufacturing operations in the US, with $2 billion earmarked to create more than 1,000 high-skilled jobs.

At the same time, the company has also invested heavily in China, spending over $450 million to build a factory in the Asian country to make inhalers to treat “smoker’s lung.”

Other Western companies such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft have clearly put a brake on their R&D investments in China, underscoring a broader shift of Western companies' de-risking: reshoring scientific investment, as they seek stability and innovation amid uncertainties in China.

IBM revealed in late August that it had decided to close some of its operations in China and limit its research and development functions. Hewlett Packard was also reported to be planning to move more than half its personal computer production out of China and Microsoft said it planned to move some of its artificial intelligence researchers from China to a new lab in Canada.

But what may go unnoticed in this wake of reshoring and protectionist measures is a large and inconvenient truth. That China is a global scientific powerhouse — and has been so for some time.

In 2018, for the first time in history, China surpassed the US in terms of the total number of scientific publications. While the US continues to remain the leader in high-impact research, the massive surge in Chinese academic output is shifting the global scientific landscape.

A study I co-authored with Hanjo Boekhout, Eelke Heemskerk and Frank Takes and released late last year — China's Rise as Global Scientific Powerhouse: A Trajectory of International Collaboration and Specialization in High-Impact Research — analyzed over 25 million scientific publications from 2008 to 2020, and found that China has become a key player in high-impact scientific research. It is not just the quantity of scientific publications published by Chinese scientists, but also their impact that stands out.

China not only ranks second to the US in terms of the share of global scientific publications, but it is also emerging as a highly integrated player, being prominently involved in top 1% and 10% cited publications.

In addition, science in general has become increasingly collaborative over the course of the past two decades. Science is more and more a team effort, and co-authorships are increasingly crossing borders.

In this context, China shows some of the highest growth rates in both domestic and international partnerships. The same study also found that its growth rate in domestic as well as international collaboration over the last two decades was far above that of the US, UK, Germany, Japan, France and Italy, among others. Thus, to lead the global scientific production race, China has widely opened to collaborations both at home and internationally to make this happen.

One of the most notable findings of the study is that China’s success in producing high-impact research is significantly tied to its international collaboration with the US. Over 45% of China-based international production of high-impact scientific research has involved US-based scientists. Much more than what conventional wisdom would suggest and demonstrating just how interconnected the field of science is today.

However, rising tensions between the US and China could threaten their scientific collaboration. The renewal of the US–China Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement, which has supported research cooperation for 45 years, is now at risk.

Export controls on China’s semiconductor industry, along with concerns over intellectual property and national security, are making it difficult to extend the pact. China is preparing for a trade war with the US, under President Donald Trump, who has signalled his intention to implement tough trade rules with China. In response, China has introduced measures such as blacklisting of foreign companies, imposing sanctions and restricting exports of minerals used in semiconductor manufacturing.

While the science and technology pact is still on hold, its cessation would lead to a major disruption in US-China scientific collaboration, threatening to unravel decades of shared progress.

At this crucial moment in time, we find ourselves at a pivotal moment in the global research landscape. The data speaks for itself: over 30% of the US’s high-impact international research has involved Chinese scientists. This is a testament to the depth and productivity of this partnership.

As both nations pull back from collaboration, they risk undermining their own scientific ecosystems, that have benefitted from their complementary strengths — China’s manufacturing and data scale alongside the US’s advanced research infrastructure and technology.

The cessation of the pact would signal more than a policy shift; it would be a step toward global scientific fragmentation at a time when unified efforts are essential to address challenges like climate change, pandemics and technological equity, especially in view of the groundbreaking innovations that AI will enable.

Moving forward, the US and China must weigh the long-term consequences of decoupling in science and technology. Sustaining collaboration, even amid competition, could be the key to future progress — scientific, economic and, most importantly, societal.