中国国际科技合作

… capacity for international science and technology cooperation … ' international science and technology cooperation using … capacity of international science and technology cooperation. …

… international cooperation for mutual benefit [1]. The international science and technology (S&T) collaboration … time China has set up intergovernmental energy cooperation agreements …

… Even though there’sa certain margin of the change among ten countries (regions), those countries have still been the most important contributors to Chinese international collaboration …

As the EU-China relations grow rapidly and comprehensively, their partnership in S&T has grown fast, too, both in terms of people mobility, collaboration in research projects, or active involvement in grand projects. Meanwhile, S&T has increasingly become one of the priority issues on the agenda of EU-China summits. In line with Sandholtz's theory on S&T cooperation, EU and China regarded S&T cooperation as a means of market and technology access, and an illustration of their strategic partnership against the backdrop of international geopolitical and economic mutual interests. However, with China's political and economic power rising, the Galileo case reveals the limitations of their partnership, and the hidden difference of their perception of S&T governance and cooperation. National security interests often prevail over other foreign policy objectives. If their S&T cooperation remains in linear innovation approach with the focus on R&D, their collaboration will be marginal, as relative gains would end their partnership once their complementarity faded away. We suggest that the employment of EU's non-linear innovation approach in EU-China S&T cooperation offers the two sides an opportunity to deepen their partnership in S&T. First, China, with its exponentially rising science budget and declining marginal production profits, needs to improve S&T governance, respond to societal challenges, and find alternative driving force of economic growth to sustain the social and political stability in China. By the same token, EU intends to place more emphasis on the S&T cooperation with China to regain economic momentum through heterogeneous and interaction-oriented innovation. Second, the EU's non-linear innovation approach can help China resolve its domestic problems through science development led by socio-economic breakthrough, and the EU can make contribution to governance in China and raise its profile there.

… of scientific and technological cooperation between China and Russia, as well as identify its bottlenecks. Based on real changes in the scientific … , as stated by Chinese Foreign Ministry …

Abstract Science is increasingly global. The number of internationally co-authored papers is growing rapidly. However, there is a paucity of analysis of the globalization of science from the international scientific collaboration perspective. Using bibliographical data from the Web of Science database, this paper uses social network analysis to investigate the structure, dynamics and determinants of international scientific collaboration networks for the period 2000–2015. Results show that globalization of science is becoming increasingly prominent, and the number of nodes and ties in the network has substantially increased over time. A bipolar world once led by Anglo-America is gradually replaced by a tri-polar world (Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific). The traditional science powerhouses have occupied central positions in the network, while the new emergent scientific countries are rising, both driving the evolution of world order. The world science system has an obvious core-periphery structure, and a more competitive multi-centric core is observed. The network hierarchy implies that the USA acts as a top-level coordination center around the world and the international collaboration follows a path-dependent process. In addition, Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP) analysis indicates that post-colonial links, English, economic proximity, science capability proximity, social proximity and international student have a positive effect on the international collaboration, while geographical distance plays a negative and insignificant role.

… collaboration is incompatible with the notion that US scientists should always lead the collaboration and provide the ideas while Chinese … designed to promote cooperation between the …

… joint research centers, 39 international technology transfer … for international science and technology cooperation have been approved by the Ministry of Science and Technology in China…

… ) to China and India in collaboration with foreign inventor(s) … Organization for Economic Cooperation and Devel opment (… granted with international cooperation to India and China, …

… China’s capacity for global science and technology governance. Innovative talent is the primary resource for international cooperation in scientific and … of global science and technology …

… basis that reflects the comparative advantages, and expand the cooperation methods … international science and technology cooperation; Russia; integration of science, technology …

International science and technology (S&T) cooperation is one of the important ways to ensure the continuous development of a national innovation system. “One Belt One Road” advocates the concepts of common business, common construction, and sharing, and new countries and regions are constantly added. However, different countries/regions have different natural and socio-economic characteristics, so the main controlling factors affecting their international S&T cooperation may not be the same. Therefore, this paper uses a combination of multi-source data and multiple methods to collectively construct an assessment model of the driving effect of international S&T cooperation in Xinjiang. The evaluation results of the entropy-weighted TOPSIS model show that the contributions of S&T level, city nature, and S&T investment to international S&T cooperation in Xinjiang are 22.9%, 22.3%, and 20.4%, respectively. Singapore, Germany, and Russia are the top three countries in terms of the effectiveness of international S&T cooperation with Xinjiang. The results of the STIRPAT model show that the total number of R&D personnel and the number of R&D personnel per 1000 workers are the main factors affecting the driving effect of international S&T cooperation. The former can be regarded as the stabilizer of international S&T cooperation. This paper’s findings can provide theoretical support for the efficient integration of diverse advantageous resources among cooperating subjects.

The issues of Sino-Russian cooperation in science and technology are the subject of the studies by both Russian and Chinese economists. However, there are still few works that systematise the main science and technology indicators (MSTI) of both countries and the impact of sanctions on the science and technology development. Filling this research gap is the goal of the present contribution. Methodologically, the paper is based on macroeconomic analysis. The methods include retrospective and comparative analysis, grouping, as well as SWOT analysis. The data were sourced from the Federal State Statistics Service of the Russian Federation, the World Bank, and the National Bureau of Statistics of China. The paper identifies success factors behind China and Russia’s science and technology development and reveals that the common factor for both countries is high quality of human capital. The MSTI analysis of each country for the period of 2010–2021, such as the share of R&D expenditure in GDP, the ratio of patents issued on inventions to country’s workingage population, the share of high-tech exports and imports in GDP, international publication activity, etc. demonstrates national differences in their scale. The SWOT analysis of the Sino-Russian cooperation in science and technology shows that the main threat to the cooperation is the sanctions pressure. The authors conclude that such cooperation does not promote Russia’s science and technology development; moreover, it may itself put the country in jeopardy as it could turn into a resource appendage of the PRC. The findings can be useful in the development of road maps and strategies for the implementation of cooperation in science and technology between China and Russia.

China’s government uses a variety of diplomatic tools to pursue its foreign policy aims including negotiating and signing formal bilateral science and technology agreements (STAs). These agreements have been signed with at least fifty-two countries. We identified agreements with an additional sixty-four countries with science and technology (S&T), among other topics such as education, as subjects for cooperation. The Ministry of Science and Technology reports having signed 115 intergovernmental science and technology agreements (STAs) and established ties with 161 countries and regions, although we were not able to identify all these agreements. The earliest of China’s STAs were signed in the 1950s with communist countries, but, in the late 1970s, China began signing agreements with scientifically-advanced nations, which opened opportunities for S&T cooperation. More recently, China has negotiated and signed scientific and technological cooperation agreements with dozens of middle- and lower-income countries, possibly to establish political goodwill. While building political ties clearly remains an important Chinese objective, access to the latest know-how in S&T has become a critical part of China’s priorities in establishing formal relationships.

the relations between China and the United States, and is use-fully seen in the context of the worldwide phenomenon of increasing international scientific cooperation. Attempts to explain this increase in international scientific cooperation have called attention to the importance of government-to-government agreements and to self-organizing tendencies within the international scientific community. In the China-U.S. case, however, co-ethnic identity, manifested in coau-thoring patterns, seems to be an especially important factor in cooperation as well. This article explores these patterns with an eye toward understanding the complex relationships between transnationalism and our understanding of Chinese nationalism and multiple Chinese identities.

The twenty-first century represents a new, dynamic period in world history in terms of the conduct of international science and technology (S&T) affairs. It is a “new era of science diplomacy”. The ability of science diplomacy to thrive has been aided by the onset of globalization. Globalization has enabled the almost unhindered movement of people, products and services, and knowledge across borders. Clearly, China has been a major beneficiary of globalization, utilizing access to the world’s leading corporations, best universities, most dynamic research institutes, and government and non-governmental international organizations and scholarly bodies as a way to support and advance its own modernization efforts. For most of the last 40 years, China has had increasingly unencumbered access to these critical repositories of know-how and information, though Chinese leaders also have felt steadily more and more anxious about the degree to which the openness of the world economy would continue to work in China’s favor. This essay analyzes China’s evolving strategy, policies, and practices regarding its international S&T relations, with special emphasis on the US–China relationship. The essay also highlights China’s strategic posture and footprint in terms of its goal of becoming a player of growing influence in the shaping of international S&T affairs.

… together in a series of agreements for cooperation that in turn led to … ’s international relations in science and technology became … -to-government agreements China became the largest …

… In that context, we examine the four US-led multilateral initiatives on technology cooperation and the Asia Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate, and evaluate their …

Researchers from China and the United States (US) are the two largest producers of global scientific publications and works co-authored by Chinese and US researchers are by far the largest body of collaborative work. This collaboration plays a central role in the collective common good that is global science. The chapter examines the growth in measures of US-China bilateral and multilateral collaborations between 2001 and 2020 and examines patterns by field of study. China-US research outputs are mostly bilateral rather than multilateral - in terms of finance and research leadership the US is more dependent on China than vice versa - but the growth of China-US collaboration is associated with an increase in network connectedness and ‘density‘ in which the evolution of China-US ties resembles larger trends in rapidly growing global science. However, the growing political disruption of US-China research collaboration might undermine this major contribution to the global common good.

… state of US China scientific and technological cooperation in … have been an inspired US-China Innovation Dialogue. In a … for achieving enhanced cooperation and the furtherance of …

… by one Chinese official long active in US–China scientific relations. During periods of good … and technology cooperation extends well beyond that prescribed in official agreements to …

… future US-China research collaborations, this study aimed to examine the patterns and nature of science … The focus on scientific collaboration between the USA and China is especially …

Recent years have brought a chill to United States-China relations that extends into scientific collaboration. The recent renewal and amendment of the US-China Science and Technology Agreement (STA), in place for nearly a half-century, both reflects current tensions and offers an opportunity to remedy them. The United States and China could seize this opportunity by developing a constructive implementation strategy under the STA specifically for climate science and technology collaboration. Such a strategy would leverage the STA framework to advance science for the common good and demonstrate that cooperation on urgent issues can endure despite political headwinds.

… SUTLIFF/SCIENCE US-China cooperation to accelerate nuclear energy innovation has potential to deliver benefits to both countries and the world. Test sites at US Department of …

… US–China relations of the last century. In his investigation in this book of scientific cooperation and conflict management in US–China … role of science and technology cooperation in the …

… IHP is UNESCO’s international scientific cooperative programme in water research, water resources management, education and capacity-building, and the only broadly-based science …

Este artigo pretende discutir a cooperação internacional do Brasil em ciência, tecnologia e inovação (CT&I) no contexto da pandemia da Covid-19 por meio da análise das iniciativas bilaterais conduzidas pelo país de janeiro a julho de 2020. A pesquisa foi baseada principalmente na investigação de websites dos principais atores brasileiros de CT&I no nível do Poder Executivo, considerando os ministérios e suas instituições relacionadas. Para desenvolver esta pesquisa, primeiramente apresenta-se a relação entre Covid-19 e CT&I. Em segundo lugar, analisam-se os argumentos sobre a cooperação internacional em CT&I inserida no cenário atual da pandemia. Em terceiro lugar, apresentam-se dados sobre CT&I do Brasil e uma discussão sobre as suas atividades na cooperação internacional em CT&I. O quarto e último ponto consiste no desenvolvimento de um quadro das iniciativas de cooperação internacional brasileira em CT&I coletadas, seguido de uma reflexão envolvendo especialmente atores e áreas. A análise mostra que o Brasil está notoriamente cooperando em distintas áreas de CT&I, muitas delas vinculadas aos interesses estratégicos do país; contudo, há um destaque para iniciativas na área de saúde e relacionadas à Covid-19, em virtude do contexto analisado. Em relação aos países parceiros, percebe-se que a maior parte das interações se dá com países desenvolvidos, apesar de relações com países em desenvolvimento também serem observadas, especialmente a destacada cooperação com a Índia.

… international innovation cooperation and actively integrating into the global science and technology … In 2019, China, Thailand, Russia, etc., jointly signed the Cooperation Initiative on the …

… In this paper, the focus will be on the phenomenon of global cooperation in science and technology, defined here as international cooperation across two or more continents between …

… the Foreign Ministry staged a new initiative on foreign science policy early in … international science and technology cooperation that can strengthen the domestic science and technology …

… of international coauthorship. We pay particular attention to factors that influence networks of international scientific collaboration … patterns of institutional collaboration in scientific fields. …

This chapter examines the connection between the BRI and Chinese policies for international cooperation in higher education (HE) and science & technology (S&T). It argues that Chinese stakeholders make the connection work in two directions: the BRI is used as an instrument to promote China’s HE and S&T agendas, and international cooperation in HE and S&T is used to promote the BRI. The concepts of education and science diplomacy are used to analyse the roles of state and non-state actors. The chapter finds that efforts to build the relationship are primarily state driven. Finally, the chapter discusses what this development means for China’s position in HE and S&T, and for other parts of the world. Who may benefit and who may lose out?

… with both knowledge exchange and knowledge protection in multilateral R&D alliances … ' decisions on governance structures jointly with the type of trilateral R&D alliances. Therefore, …

While technology continues to be seen as a key element in the move to sustainable development, international efforts around technology to support sustainable development transitions in developing countries have failed to yield results congruent with the needs. This review paper aims to contribute to, and help change, the conversation on international technology transfer (ITT) such that it leads to more productive international cooperative efforts for sustainable development in developing nations. We examine ITT in the health, agriculture, and climate and energy areas, juxtaposing it with relevant literature. Supporting domestic and international actors and processes, we highlight what are key elements for success in these areas of action to more effectively implement the SDGs in energy and environment in developing countries. Finally, we suggest that “innovation cooperation” is a better framing than “technology transfer” for advancing international efforts on technology for sustainable development. Such a framing allows for a broader and more comprehensive perspective on technology‐related cooperation between countries. It also emphasizes the need for equitable partnerships rather than donor–recipient relationships and for development of local innovation capabilities, leading to more effective marshaling of technologies to help developing countries achieve sustainable development.

Joint R&D projects have emerged as a significant model for the development of research and technological … of joint R&D projects and the characteristics of R&D networks in which the …

… relates to both the knowledge base and global innovation network focused articles in this … that the innovation literature tends to focus on inter-firm networks and that intra-firm networks of …

… and international) in promoting knowledge flows. Although we document the importance of global networks in our findings, our results also reveal the value of local networks and …

… This editorial introduces the articles addressing the multifaceted and composite phenomenon of knowledge flows and externalities within innovation networks. The papers offer a …

… a shift from global production networks, driven by the search for markets and lower cost production sites, to global innovation networks (GINs), driven by the search for knowledge. This …

… of global knowledge flows. The aim of this chapter is to explore the differentiated nature of global knowledge flows in regional innovation … concerns that global innovation networks would …

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the prospects of a Southeast Asian knowledge economy in light of regional integration processes and the participation of Southeast Asia in global innovation networks. Design/methodology/approach The evidence base is a combination of quantitative data on R&D investments, patent applications and publications, with qualitative data from 40 semi-structured expert interviews conducted with innovation experts, research managers and policymakers in six ASEAN Member States. Findings Despite economic growth and increases in R&D inputs and outputs in individual ASEAN Member States, innovation policy at regional ASEAN level remains weak. In addition, the economic integration of the ASEAN Economic Community is progressing slowly. In this environment, evidence is presented for a certain level of regional integration when it comes to the exploitation of knowledge produced within and outside of ASEAN. While a regional market for knowledge exploitation is conceivable, this is not accompanied by the regional integration of knowledge production. Practical implications The main practical implication of this argument is the need for ASEAN policymakers to appreciate the disconnection between regional knowledge production and exploitation. This paper offers conceptual tools to engage in ASEAN-level policy discussions on this issue that can help facilitate the best possible regional outcome. Originality/value Despite several studies on the ASEAN Economic Community process, there has been no contribution so far that combines a discussion of the economic integration process with a look at the regional knowledge economy and innovation systems. This perspective does not only contribute to innovation systems literature, but also entails important policy lessons.

… the significance of innovative networks that extend beyond firms … of practice, knowledge communities and transnational com… We use the term ‘knowledge transfer’ to convey how forms of …

… that the Belt and Road Initiative needs to have a scientific wing. … of Science and Technology (MOST). His research directions include international scientific and technological cooperation…

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) promotes sustainable development in the participating countries by facilitating technology transfer, talent development, and industrial upgrading. Technological cooperation under the BRI plays a crucial role in helping these countries achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, BRI cooperation also faces significant challenges, including geopolitical, economic, social, environmental, and legal risks. This paper reviews the current research on BRI technological cooperation, covering cooperation models, influencing factors, mechanisms, and the economic and social impacts of such cooperation. It examines both the opportunities and challenges involved and provides policy recommendations and action plans. This review offers valuable insights for researchers interested in BRI technological cooperation and contributes to advancing sustainable development in BRI countries.

The Belt and Road Initiative, proposed by the Chinese government in 2013, has exerted great influence, not only on geopolitics and the economy but also on scientific research. This paper investigates the relationship between scientific collaboration and knowledge production of the countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative project. To this end, we used 314,678 co-authored papers and 6,226,577 paper publications in these countries from 2009 to 2018 to measure scientific collaboration and knowledge production, respectively. Additionally, we selected the country’s economic level, the number of specialized disciplines, and political stability as influencing indicators. Methodologically, we established a dynamic panel model and used the generalised method of moments to empirically analyze the relationship between the two and the influencing factors. The results reveal that the scientific collaboration and knowledge production of the countries along the Belt and Road Initiative are mutually reinforcing and show accumulative effects. The number of specialized disciplines and political stability are major influencing factors for scientific collaboration and knowledge production. Knowledge production can facilitate scientific collaboration by increasing number of specialized disciplines, economic development and political stability. Scientific collaboration can weaken the promotion of knowledge production in a similar way, exclusive of economic development.

… change research and technological cooperation among participating … countries of the Belt and Road Initiative and analyzes the … that conducting science and technology cooperation in …

… Sciences and the Belt and Road regions. The findings reveal a significant increase in the output of scientific and technological cooperation … achievements in technology transfer. Based …

Although a number of studies have discussed the economic, geopolitical and environmental impacts of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), there is a scarcity of analysis on the importance of science in the Belt and Road (B&R). Adopting bibliographical data from Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science database for the period 2000–2018, this study investigates the network properties, topological structure, spatial pattern, position of countries, core-periphery sets, and the hierarchy of the network from a dynamic perspective. The results show that scientific collaboration is increasingly frequent. The “hub-and-spoke” and triangulated structures coexist, shaping the landscape of the network. With the decline of Central and Eastern Europe, and the rise of the Asia-Pacific region, the spatial pattern evolves from ‘‘strong Western and weak Eastern” to ‘‘weak Western and strong Eastern’’. The central position has been occupied by India, China, and Turkey, while Russia’s influence has lessened over time. Moreover, the collaboration network is a typical core–periphery structure with prominent hierarchical features. China, Poland, and Saudi Arabia are the top-tier coordination centers within sub-networks. Finally, this study provides policy recommendations and prospective research directions.

Scientific collaboration has become an important part of the people-to-people exchanges in the Belt and Road initiative, and remarkable progress has been made since 2013. Taking the 65 countries along the Belt and Road (BRI countries) as the research areas and using collaborated Web of Science (WOS) core collection papers to construct an international scientific collaboration matrix, the paper explores the spatial structure, hierarchy and formation mechanisms of scientific collaboration networks of 65 countries along the Belt and Road. The results show that: 1) Beyond the Belt and Road regions (BRI regions), Central & Eastern Europe, China and West Asia & North Africa have formed a situation in which they all have the most external links with other countries beyond BRI regions. China has the dominant role over other BRI countries in generating scientific links. The overall spatial structure has changed to a skeleton structure consisting of many dense regions, such as Europe, North America, East Asia and Oceania. 2) Within the Belt and Road regions, Central & Eastern Europe has become the largest collaboration partner with other sub-regions in BRI countries. The spatial structure of scientific collaboration networks has transformed from the ‘dual core’ composed of China and the Central & Eastern Europe region, to the ‘multi-polarization’ composed of ‘one zone and multi-points’. 3) The hierarchical structure of scientific collaboration networks presents a typical ‘core-periphery’ structure, and changes from ‘single core’ to ‘double cores’. 4) Among the formation mechanisms of scientific collaboration networks, scientific research strength and social proximity play the most important roles, while geographical distance gradually weakens the hindrance to scientific collaboration.

… and authorizations from Belt and Road countries in … technology cooperation agreements with multiple countries along the route and established the Belt and Road International Science …

The Belt and Road Initiative (B&R), was initiated by China in 2013, and it covers over 60% and 30% of the world’s population and GDP, respectively. The initiative has directed a great deal of investment in energy, transportation, and 5G. Whilst much attention has been focused on cooperation in international trade, technological cooperation in the form of patents has been largely ignored. This paper investigates the formation of technological cooperative relationships among B&R countries within a technical cooperation network. Comprehensive consideration of various factors between participating countries was undertaken, using statistical methods from social network analysis theory. The node attributes and relations between countries and the network structure were studied in a sequence of network analyses using temporal exponential random graph models (TERGMs) and static exponential random graph models (ERGMs). The main findings suggest that research ability, financial ability, technological innovation ability, technological spillover proximity, geographical proximity, and technical proximity have an impact on participation in technical cooperation between B&R countries. Research ability, technological spillover proximity, geographical proximity, and technical proximity have a positive influence on the development of cooperation. However, the financial and technological innovation ability of a country does not actively promote the development of cooperation. The entire cooperation network structure does not have a greater aggregation effect compared with a random network, and intermediary multi-path cooperation is not obvious. This paper analyzes the driving factors for technological cooperation through a systematic study of the characteristics and relationships of B&R countries, and also of the network characteristics among B&R countries. The results of our analysis show that the characteristics of technical cooperation in the B&R region provide a reference for the study of international technical cooperation.