Published on the 07/03/2023 | Written by Heather Wright

China’s scientists are leading their global counterparts in 37 out of 44 ‘critical’ technologies, including AI algorithms, distributed ledgers, advanced data analytics and protective cybersecurity technologies, with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute warning its findings should be a ‘wake-up call’ for democratic nations.

The think tank’s Critical Technology Tracker says finds China has established a ‘sometimes stunning’ lead over the United States in high-impact research across the majority of critical and emerging technology domains including space, cybersecurity, robotics, AI, defence, advanced materials, biotech and key quantum technology areas.

“Governments must make more space for new, bigger and more creative policy ideas.”

No other country comes close to China or the US, though Australia does feature in the top five for a number of categories including protective cybersecurity technologies (4th) and distributed ledgers and additive manufacturing including 3D printing (both 5th).

The race to be the next most important tech powerhouse behind China and the US is a close run battle between the UK and India, both of which claim a place in the top five countries in 29 of the 44 technologies, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) says.

The report, which is based on the top 10 percent highly cited research in peer reviewed journals and does not include any classified research or that done behind closed doors by private companies, says western democracies are losing the global technological competition, including the race for scientific and research breakthroughs, and the ability to retain global talent.

“The Critical Technology Tracker shows that, for some technologies, all of the world’s top 10 leading research institutions are based in China and are collectively generating nine times more high-impact research papers than the second-ranked country (most often the US).”

It turns the idea that innovation requires free markets and strong venture capital support on its head.

China, it says, is on track to potentially establish monopolies in several areas, including advanced radiofrequency communications including 5G and 6G; nanoscale materials and manufacturing and photonic sensors.

Valid concern or Sinophobia? 

“China’s overall research lead, and its dominant concentration of expertise across a range of strategic sectors, has short and long term implications for democratic nations,” the ASPI says.

“In the long term, China’s leading research position means that it has set itself up to excel not just in current technological development in almost all sectors, but in future technologies that don’t yet exist.

“Unchecked, this could shift not just technological development and control, but global power and influence to an authoritarian state where the development, testing and application of emerging, critical and military technologies isn’t open and transparent and where it can’t be scrutinised by independent civil society and media,” the ASPI report says.

While the ASPI is largely government funded, with support from tech and defence companies, funding for the Critical Technology Tracker came from the US State Department’s Global Engagement Center and a grant from the Special Competitive Studies Project, an initiative aiming to ‘ensure the US is positioned and organised to win the techno-economic competition between now and 2030’.

That’s something sure to raise hackles in China, which recently slammed the US government’s ban on TikTok on government devices as highlighting the US’ own insecurities.

The report came days before China’s Premier Li Kequiang reiterated a push for a ‘whole nation strategy’ on technology, pooling the nation’s resources to achieve self-reliance in technology.

Li says China’s scientific and technological policies should aim at building the country’s strength and self-reliance across science and technology, with a need to better leverage the role of the government in pooling resources to make tech breakthroughs.

R&D for cutting edge technologies should be accelerated, he says, along with the promotion of their application, with the development of a platform economy supported and regular oversight conducted.

His comments came hard on the heels of increasing US restrictions, with the Biden administration blacklisting 37 more Chinese companies from selling into the United States, including cloud computing company Inspur.

Li’s comments also highlight China’s growing determination to break ‘chokepoints’ that leave it dependent on foreign countries for key technologies.

President Xi Jinping made similar comments late last month, saying China needed to solve key technology problems ‘from the source’ and strengthen basic research in science and technology if it is to achieve self-reliance and become the global tech power it wants to be – and to achieve its goal of being self-sufficient in technology by 2035.

The US has been attempting to thwart China’s tech ambitions, including doing its best to hobble any semiconductor advancements for China. It’s Chips Act provides US$280 billion to boost domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors in the US. Export controls have also been put in place requiring licenses for companies exporting chips to China using US tools or software, no matter where they are made in the world. While Taiwan is seen as the semiconductor manufacturing powerhouse, supplying more than 90 percent of the world’s advanced semiconductors, most of the research and design is actually conducted in the US, the ASPI notes.

It also put in measures to prevent US citizens and green card holders from working for some Chinese chip companies, attempting to cut off the talent pipeline.

While the US focus in that area might be on semi-conductors, the ASPI report shows one-fifth of China’s high impact papers are being authored by researchers with post-graduate training in a Five-Eyes country.

Research power, however, doesn’t automatically translate to the ability to produce a technology and scale up its manufacturing. However, the report suggests Beijing has built the foundations to position itself as the world’s leading science and technology superpower.

“Actualising research performance, no matter how impressive, into major technological gains can be a difficult and complicated step that requires other inputs. However, what ASPI’s new Critical Technology Tracker gives us… are unique insights into strategy, intent and potential future capabilities. It also provides valuable insights into the spread, and concentrations of, global expertise across a range of critical areas.”

The report includes 23 recommendations around boosting investment, driving commercialisation and building talent pipelines; global partnerships; supercharging intelligence efforts and moonshots.

“Governments around the world should work both collaboratively and individually to catch up to China and, more broadly, they must pay greater attention to the world’s centre of technological innovation and strategic competition: The Indo-Pacific,” the report says.

“While China is in front, it’s important for democracies to take stock of the power of their potential aggregate lead and the collective strengths of regions and groups – for example the EU, the Quad and AUKUS.”

Such leads can only be realised through ‘far deeper’ collaboration between partners and allies, greater investment in areas including R&D, talent and commercialisation, and more focused intelligence strategies.

“And… governments must make more space for new, bigger and more creative policy ideas – the step-up in performance required demands no less.”

National strategies that are both ‘clear and ambitious’ providing strategic decisions and policies for commercialisation success and support for public-private partnerships to build commercialisation hubs are highlighted.

Governments should also plan for tech visas, ‘friend-shoring’ and R&D grants between allies; a revitalisation of the university sector through specialised scholarships for those working at the forefront of critical tech research and restructuring of taxation systems to divert private capital towards venture capital and scale-up efforts for promising new technologies.