The United Nations and many researchers have emphasized the critical role of international science collaboration in solving global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and pandemics. The rise of non-Western countries as scientific powers helps to conduct this type of global cooperative research. For example, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa built tuberculosis research networks in 2017 and made significant advances in basic and applied research into the disease.
However, in the past few years, rising tensions between superpowers, increasing nationalism, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the war in Ukraine have contributed to the actions of nations in ways that are more distrustful and insular in general. One result is more difficult for researchers to work with scholars in other nations.
The near -global loss of collaboration with Russian scholars after the invasion of Ukraine – in everything from humanities research to climate science in the Arctic – is one example of science being victimized – and used as a tool for – international politics. Scientific collaboration between China and the US also breaks down in fields such as microelectronics and quantum computing due to national security concerns on both sides.
I am a policy expert who studies international research collaboration as it relates to global issues and geopolitical polarization. I understand the need for democratic countries to respond to the power of authoritarian countries such as China and acute crises such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But reducing or stopping international research comes with its own risks. It slows the production of knowledge needed to solve long -term global problems and reduces the potential for future scientific collaboration.
Growth of non-Western science
Since the 1990s and the collapse of the Soviet Union, global collaboration in science has increased dramatically. Read also : Five ways to survive air travel this summer. There are several reasons for this development.
First, the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to increased openness in the global scientific exchange. In particular, there is an increase in the number of students from developing and non-Western countries who are heading to higher education in the West. This movement builds a network of researchers from many countries. Second, massive collaborative scientific efforts – such as the Human Genome Project – as well as the ever -increasing importance of expensive, large research laboratories and instruments have encouraged international collaboration. Finally, the digital revolution has made it easier to communicate and share data across borders. This all leads to collaborative research and results in many fields including gene technology, climate science, and artificial intelligence.
While Western countries dominated the scientific landscape of the 20th century, globalization has benefited many non-Western countries.
In the middle of the late 20th century, China, India, Russia, Turkey, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and many other nations all significantly improved their scientific capabilities. In doing so they have greatly contributed to human knowledge. China in particular has invested heavily in its scientific capabilities and is now the largest producer of scientific publications.
Developing scientific capacity in many parts of the world and building academic relationships are crucial when responding to new viruses or tracking climate change. The more countries that share data and coordinate policy responses, the easier it is to contain viruses or understand global warming.
Western concern of a rising China
In general, there are three global superpowers that compete for scientific and technological leadership today: the US, China, and the European Union. This may interest you : UN and partners meet to tackle ‘critical’ state of global food crisis.
In May 2022, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “China is the only country that has the intention to change the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to do so. Beijing’s vision will keep us from value- universal values that have supported much of the world’s progress over the past 75 years.
China’s rise in science and technology has been met with a severe response from the West. Australia passed a law in 2020 that gave the federal government a veto for foreign agreements under investigation. In the U.S., the Export Control Reform Act 2018 is designed to reduce dependence on China for emerging and basic technologies.
Science as a tool of politics
The U.S. government has taken important steps to limit China’s scientific progress and international influence. In 2018, the US launched a large -scale anti -espionage effort called the China Initiative. In this initiative, the FBI broadly examined U. This may interest you : Russian scientist accused of treason dies in custody.S.-China relations in the corporate and academic sectors. The Chinese initiative failed to find Chinese spies. But three U.S. -based scholars were punished for failing to disclose Chinese ties.
The China Initiative has faced heavy criticism from researchers, university leaders, and civil rights organizations because of claims of ethnic profiles. The Biden administration officially canceled the initiative in February 2022. But efforts to restrict China’s science and technology industry through trade sanctions to companies such as Huawei restrict American companies from doing business with Chinese technology companies. Chinese initiatives and sanctions also make researchers on both sides wary of collaboration.
The European Union took a similar stance. They call China both a partner, a competitor, and a systemic competitor. The EU has outlined a goal to increase European scientific and technological autonomy to reduce dependence on other countries, particularly China, and began implementing that strategy in 2021.
China also uses science, technology, and scientific research in general to serve national interests. The government explicitly pushed the idea that research should primarily serve national needs, and more Chinese scholars were in political control. By 2021 there will be 18 research centers dedicated to studying and promoting Xi Jinping’s ideas on issues such as legal regulation, economics, and green development.
Global consequences
Many researchers in the U.S., Europe and China have voiced concern that geopolitical rivals limit international research collaboration at the world’s most needed time.
There is a major risk that barriers to international scientific collaboration will be further enhanced, more detrimental to data sharing, research quality and the ability to disseminate results that contribute to problem solving. I often hear researchers, university leaders and funding institutions in Europe, the US, and China vent their frustration with the current situation. Many research communities want to see a more open and global landscape of science.
It is possible to work in a future where science is more separate – but not naively isolated – from changing power dynamics. As issues like climate change rise in severity, it will become only more important that researchers build international relationships that are responsible, reciprocal, transparent, and fair.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Our stories can be republished online or printed under a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. We ask that you edit only for style or short, providing the correct attribution and a link to our web site. Please see our republishing guidelines for the use of photos and graphics.
