A new approach to assessing the science and technology competitiveness of China's provincial academies of sciences

Purpose： This study aims to establish a new framework for evaluating science and technology （S＆T） competitiveness that is appropriate to meet the needs of provincial academies of sciences （PASs） in China.Design/methodology/approaches： An evaluation index, including such assessing indicators as research strength, research impact, research development and trends, and regional contributions, is developed for China＇s PASs. Taking the Jiangxi Academy of Sciences （JXAS） as an example, we first explain how to apply this framework to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of PASs in China. Then, we compare the results of all 17 PASs in order to get a comprehensive understanding of their competitiveness.Findings： Our results show the development path, current status, innovation advantages, and weaknesses of JXAS very clearly. Based on our comparative analysis, we ranked the 17 PASs from the perspective of different dimensions, by which their competitiveness strengths and weaknesses can be highlighted for improvement.Research limitations： In this analysis, we did not take S＆T policies, S＆T systems, or historical factors into consideration. Thus, we may have ignored the influence of the soft individual differences of different PASs in China..Practical implications： The evaluation index developed in this paper provides a useful insight into an analytical method that can be used by PASs or other provincial research institutions （PRIs） to assess their competitiveness.Originality/value： Compared with existing evaluation frameworks, our method has two main characteristics： First, we added three new dimensions, including the PASs＇ applicable research outputs, regional contributions, and comparative advantages; second, we conducted a comparative analysis of local research institutes in their different advantaged industrial areas, which makes our analytical method more comprehensive for local research institutions.

Structure of National Science and Technology Competitiveness: A Methodological and Empirical Study

This paper clearly defines the concepts of the national competitiveness,the national S&T competitiveness,and the national S&T competitiveness structure.It develops an evaluation framework with three dimensions:the national S&T competitive potential,the national S&T competitive strength and the national S&T competitive effectiveness.This paper proposes a structure analysis method and depicts the national S&T competitiveness structure of 35 countries in an empirical research.Apart from the definitions and the structure analysis method,this paper mainly draws the following conclusions:(1)In the one-dimensional national S&T competitiveness structure,the top 5 countries were all developed countries in 2015,while the developing countries generally performed better than developed countries considering the average annual growth rate of the national S&T competitiveness index.The 35 countries are clustered into 4 categories using the two-dimensional structure analysis method.For example,based on the ranking of the national S&T competitive strength index and the national S&T competitive effectiveness index of the 35 countries in 2015,the 35 countries are clustered into four categories:high-strength and higheffectiveness,low-strength and high-effectiveness,low-strength and low-effectiveness,and high-strength and low-effectiveness.(2)To a large extent,there is a significant correlation between the national S&T competitiveness index score and the GDP per capita value.And to a certain extent,there is some correlation between the national S&T competitiveness index score and the GDP value.Moreover,under the background of strength and effectiveness combination,or under the background of strength and potential combination,the national S&T competitiveness structure and GDP or GDP per capita show significant relationship.

The Underlying Motivations and Long-Term Trends of the US Decoupling of China-US Science and Technology Relations

Since 2018,the US government has adopted a range of restrictive measures on China-US science and technology exchange,as it strives for a decoupling strategy against China.This strategy has brought about historic change in China-US science and technology relations.The US government has set out to obstruct the free flow of technology,data,capital,markets,and talents between China and the United States,thereby changing the basic rationale of China-US science and technology cooperation.The US has multiple underlying motivations for implementing this strategy including recognizing the security threats posed by China’s cutting-edge technology development,treating China as a competitor in global science and technology diplomacy,prompting the backflow of the technological industrial chain,and the strengthened industrial competition between the two countries.Decoupling is one of the competition strategies of the United States.It is aimed at ensuring a favorable position for their national innovation systems,particularly in China-US competition.However,the limitations of the decoupling strategy may not allow the US to achieve what it desires.These limitations also provide space for the two countries to ease their competitive relationship.

Ultra Mobile Broadband Technology Overview and Competitive Advantages

To efficiently meet the increasing demands for mobile broadband, Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB) is designed to complement 3G deployments. It is equipped with all the necessary features for optimal support of real-time and best-effort traffic with seamless mobility. This article overviews the UMB technology, and discusses its competitive advantages, which are fast time to market, flexible deployment options, inherently designed for real-time services and flexible IP-based network architecture. Moreover, the article analyzes key UMB design features, including Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA), advanced antenna techniques, Reverse Link (RL) sector capacity optimization, adaptive interference management mechanisms, efficient RL control design, low-overhead signaling, fast seamless handoffs, multi-carrier support and beacons, enhanced terminal battery life, and flexible IP-based network architecture. UMB is well suited to be at the center of the future that melds broadband applications with faster, more capable mobile multimedia devices. UMB’s competitive advantages provide operators with continuous differentiation today and tomorrow.

China-US High-Tech Competition,Trade Conflict and Development Rights

The power and interest of industrial manufacturers are determined by their status in the relations of production.At the international level,countries see their economic and political status rise only when they climb the ladder in the international division of labor.As the primary production forces,science and technology are the main drivers behind such change.As new technologies give rise to new industries and restructure the international division of labor,developed countries strive to enhance the protection of their intellectual property rights(IPR)and safeguard their monopoly over core technologies.For developed countries,technological prowess holds the key to their supremacy in the global supply chain and international relations.The 19 th CPC National Congress makes clear the overarching goal in the new era is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation and turn China into a strong modern country.As an important material condition for achieving this goal,China must transition from being medium-and low-end links in the international division of labor to becoming high-end links.In this process,China will encounter backlash from developed countries that lead in the international division of labor.The recent China-US tussle over trade in high-tech goods is a case in point,and should be viewed through the lens of the relations of production and the international division of labor.The insights thus achieved will be of great significance to China’s future development.

The Biden Administration’s Scientific and Technological Competition Strategy toward China

Scientific and technological(S&T) competition has become a core and frontier issue in the ongoing China–U.S. strategic competition and the main focus of both countries. Currently, the Biden administration is adopting an S&T competition strategy toward China based on the “small yard, high fence” tactical logic, which involves three pillars: investment to make America strong, alignment to get things under control, and competition to weaken China. In the current context of the China–U.S. competition entering a new normal, five inherent contradictions, namely, the gap between strategic expectations and policy effects, shortfall between action capabilities and policy objectives, push-and-pull between strategic deployment and domestic politics, clash between strategic intentions and the S&T innovation ecosystem, and divergences between American priorities and the interests of American allies, will dictate how this administration will implement its S&T competition strategy toward China.

The Roots of Great Power Competition:An Analysis Based on the Increasing Returns Mechanism

Geopolitics,technology and international institutions are three major areas of great power competition.In the analysis of great power relations,both the balance of power theory and the hegemony theory rely on the assumption of diminishing returns and ignore the possibility of increasing returns.Increasing returns play an extensive role in geographical location,technological evolution and institutional change;accordingly,the increasing returns mechanism in great power relations is reflected in the geopolitical competition,technological competition and international institutional competition of great powers.The rational expectation that initial advantages will be transformed into long-term advantages through the mechanism of increasing returns drives great powers into competition whether they are rivals or allies.As specific mechanisms leading to increasing returns,coordination effects operate in geopolitical competition,technological competition and international institution competition;learning effects are found in technological competition and international institution competition;and adaptive expectations play a part in international institution competition.Various cases,ranging from the Anglo-Dutch rivalry over maritime hegemony in the 17th century to the current US-European competition over international investment arbitration regimes,show that great power competition derives from the logic of increasing returns.