Search

Begin New Search Topic Innovation Political Geography Asia

41. Does China Really Dominate Global Innovation? The Impact of China’s Subsidized Patent Application System

Author:
Jonathan Putnam, Hieu Luu, and Ngoc Ngo
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Over the past two decades, China’s economy has grown impressively, while its patented innovations have grown at an even higher rate. But this patent application trend should not simply be accepted at face value. The Chinese government has subsidized patent applications as part of its overall domestic industrial policy agenda, which underlies China’s claim to have “won” the global innovation race, especially in next-generation technologies like 5G or AI. Our study shows that high rates of patenting do not necessarily mean dominance, or even leadership, among the world’s innovation economies. China’s recent announcement that it plans to end subsidies for patent applications by 2025 perhaps acknowledges that its policy is no longer necessary or desirable. In any case, uncritical reports of China’s innovation dominance, overall or in prominent high-tech sectors, should be viewed skeptically, especially by policymakers.
Topic:
Intellectual Property/Copyright, Law, Economy, and Innovation
Political Geography:
China and Asia

42. Directions of Innovation Policy: Contrasting Views of China and the US

Author:
Anna Jaguaribe and Kamila Aben Athar
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
Abstract:
At the 24th China Analysis Group Meeting, experts analyzed the contrasting views of innovation policies in China and in the United States. The 14th five-year plan continues most of the economic efforts that characterized the last decade while also challenging some certain well-established elements. Internet development is still the dominant focus, but we can also observe the shift towards a service-based economy and high investment in infrastructure. According to the participants, one of the most relevant differences between the US and China is the way non-state actors are connected to the national government. American innovation efforts heavily feature research groups and private corporations having an active role, while in China the government puts up barriers that distort the market and influence it more directly. The tension between the two countries is stronger than ever and the new Biden administration brings a new set of uncertainties to the table, but at the same time, both China and the US are heavily dependent on each other economically. China’s efforts to expand its influence worldwide by negotiating with multiple countries will most likely exacerbate the conflict and talks regarding a decoupling, which currently seems unlikable.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Markets, Infrastructure, and Innovation
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America

43. Searching for the Binding Constraint to Digital Financial Inclusion in Pakistan: A Decision Tree Approach

Author:
Imran Khan and Karrar Hussain Jaffar
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Over the last decade, Pakistan has seen improvements in the coverage of its networks of bank branches, ATMs, and mobile money agents. However, the country is lagging behind comparator countries when it comes to the financial inclusion of its population; according to the latest estimates, barely 20 percent are currently included. By using the Claessens and Rojas-Suarez (2020) decision tree methodology, this paper assesses the potential demandand supply-side constraints limiting the usage of digital payment services to identify which constraints are binding. Our main finding is that Pakistan’s institutional weaknesses constitute the most important binding constraint. These weaknesses have incentivized the creation of a sizable informal economy that has resulted in a preference for cash over the use of formal financial channels for the majority of the population. Reflecting institutional deficiencies, the imposition of a withholding tax on financial transactions undertaken by individuals who did not file tax returns has further encouraged a move toward cash and away from digital finance. On the demand side, Pakistan lags behind comparable countries on various indicators such as technical literacy, awareness about the functionality of products, and social inclusion of women. Nevertheless, we find that these constraints are severe only for specific subpopulations. Consistent with our conclusion that institutional weaknesses, the binding constraint, have created deep incentives to remain informal, a considerable proportion of mobile phone–owning financially excluded individuals continue to choose to be financially excluded in spite of having high levels of technical literacy, functional awareness, and trust.
Topic:
Finance, Innovation, Banking, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Pakistan and Asia

44. Enhancing US-Japan cooperation on global supply chains

Author:
Miyeon Oh and James Hildebrand
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Mounting US-China tensions and the COVID-19 pandemic have led to growing calls in the United States and among its allies and partners, including Japan, to address the vulnerabilities in global supply chains critical to national security and economic competitiveness. Strategic uncertainty has led stakeholders to pose the following questions. What role should government play, and to what extent can, or should, governments require firms to operate more in line with national security interests? How can firms manage short-term and long-term risks to balance national security requirements and commercial interests? How should trusted partners be defined, and what is a desirable allied and multilateral approach to enhancing security and resilience of global high-tech supply chains? With new administrations in both the United States and Japan, the two countries have an opportunity to consider these questions and rethink coordination of their efforts to establish secure and resilient supply chains. This issue brief analyzes recent developments in US and Japanese supply-chain policy, explores the importance of closer coordination through case studies of the semiconductor and rare-earth minerals industries, and provides a set of recommendations for the Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Yoshihide Suga administrations to enhance US-Japan cooperation in the years ahead. These recommendations include actions to operationalize the April 2021 US-Japan Joint Leaders’ Statement by creating a bilateral interagency Supply Chain Steering Committee that includes sector-specific working groups to enhance public-private-partnerships in high-technology industries, and by expanding bilateral supply-chain cooperation into multilateral efforts through flexible and informal frameworks.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Economy, Innovation, Trade, Defense Industry, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

45. The challenge to US hegemony and the “Gilpin Dilemma”

Author:
Giorgio Romano Schutte
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI)
Institution:
Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI)
Abstract:
This article makes a comparison between the challenges faced by the US to maintain its hegemonic position at the end of the 1970s and in the 2010s. To do so we review Robert Gilpin’s writing during the first period. He suggested the US had three options: 1) a defensive protectionist reaction 2) fragmentation of the international system 3) a new wave of innovation, (“rejuvenation”). It is argued that the Reagan administration was able to establish support for the third option. We argue the US is now faced with the same dilemma again, but with a different kind of challenger: China.
Topic:
Foreign Direct Investment, Hegemony, Conflict, and Innovation
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

46. The Effects of SPSs and TBTs on Innovation: Evidence from Exporting Firms in Viet Nam

Author:
Duc Anh Dang and Vuong Anh Dang
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures and technical barriers to trade (TBTs) in destination markets may affect firms’ performance. In this paper, we examine how meeting foreign standards affects exporting firms’ innovation, reflected in the product quality, production processes, skills, and technological acquisition. The analysis relies on official regulations on non-tariff measures released by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and panel data for manufacturing firms in Viet Nam during 2013–2015. To correct for the potential endogeneity of SPS measures and TBTs and measurement errors, we use the number of SPS measures and TBTs imposed on other Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Member States as an instrument variable. Our results indicate that a higher number of SPS measures and TBTs applied by destination countries increases the probability of Vietnamese exporting firms’ skill acquisition. SPS measures also have higher positive impacts on product quality improvement and skill acquisition in the food processing sector. The SPS measures and TBTs have larger impacts on small firms than large firms. Foreign firms tend to acquire more technology and skills than domestic firms when facing SPS measures and TBTs by importing countries. Higher SPS measures and TBTs have more effects on the probability of acquiring skills by state-owned firms. However, the propensity of product quality and technological acquisition of non-state firms is much higher than that of state-owned firms when facing a greater level of SPS measures and TBTs.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, Governance, Innovation, and Trade
Political Geography:
Asia and Southeast Asia

47. Coordination Failure: Risks of US-China competition in space

Author:
Gidon Gautel
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
The 2020s will see a flurry of space activity, with both national and commercial programs picking up pace. Both the United States and China hold strong ambitions in telecommunications, lunar exploration, and beyond. However, currently fraught relations between the superpowers are unlikely to improve and may yet deteriorate further. On the one hand, competition between both countries may drive space activities and foster technological innovation. On the other, as both superpowers expand their activities in space, geopolitical tensions may increase the risk of harmful dynamics that could endanger the sustainable rollout of future programs. In this Strategic Update, Gidon Gautel seeks to outline and call attention to two high-risk flash points arising from the development of the US and China’s national space programmes and industries.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Space, Innovation, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

48. The Role of Innovation in Skill Development: Evidence from Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Viet Nam

Author:
Duc Anh Dang and Vuong Ahn Dang
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
Using the Small and Medium Enterprise Survey in Vietnam and three proxies of innovation, we study the impact of firm innovation on on-the-job training in the manufacturing sector from 2007 through 2015. To address potential measurement errors and omitted variable problems, we use the average level of innovation in the same sector in other districts as an instrument for firms’ innovations. We find that firms provide additional training for existing workers when introducing new technology, and high-value-added firms provide additional training for existing workers. Moreover, government assistance may not be the main reason that encourages firms to provide training. The results also show that firms hire more skilled workers when implementing innovations.
Topic:
Development, Training, Innovation, and Skilled Labor
Political Geography:
Asia and Vietnam

49. U.S.-China Technological Rivalry and Its Implications for Korea

Author:
Wonho Yeon
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Recent developments in advanced technology are changing the concept of hegemonic competition. The key feature of technologies in the 4th Industrial Revolution is dual-use. Emerging technologies such as 5G, AI, big data, robotics, aerospace, supercomputers, and quantum computer-related technologies can be used for both civilian and military purposes. The more you invest in the development of advanced technologies, the closer you will be to economic and military hegemony. Therefore, it is no wonder that the U.S. harbors great concerns facing the rise of China in these advanced technologies. To estimate and compare the innovation productivity of the U.S. and that of China, this study constructs a structural estimation model in which each country produces international patents using R&D expenditures and R&D researchers. Empirical results have presented novel findings indicating that China’s innovation productivity has surpassed that of the U.S. since 2015. At the same time we can observe that the U.S. has the world’s largest intellectual property surplus and keeps expanding it, while China’s intellectual property deficit has been growing every year. Given the two contradictory facts - China’s high innovation productivity and low intellectual property balance - we can conclude that China is strong at “innovation” but weak at “invention.” Knowing this, the U.S. eventually began to target this vulnerability. This is the U.S.’ Tech-Decoupling strategy. To achieve U.S.-China tech decoupling, the U.S. has been strengthening trade and investment sanctions against China. In specific, the U.S. has been utilizing the Export Control Reform Act (ECRA), Section 889 of the 2019 National Defense Authority Act, and the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA). In return, China is responding to the U.S. sanctions with the new “Long March” strategy rather than a tit-for-tat strategy. In other words, China has been setting long-term aims and responding to the U.S. sanctions by improving institutional arrangements, refining industrial policies, and developing its own technologies such as “Dual-circulation strategy” and “New Infrastructure Plan.” Ironically, increasing pressure from the U.S. is expected to further strengthen China’s R&D capabilities in advanced technology and accelerate its competitiveness in emerging industries. With the onset of the 4th Industrial Revolution, China is rapidly closing the quality gap and technology gap in major industries where Korea has a comparative advantage. If Korea does not adequately respond to changes, it may be difficult to maintain a comparative advantage over China. Thus, now that U.S.-China tensions are intensifying, Korea is facing a pivotal moment in determining the future path of its economy.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Sanctions, Investment, Innovation, Trade, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, Korea, and United States of America

50. A strategic concept for countering Russian and Chinese hybrid threats

Author:
Lauren Speranza
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Tackling hybrid threats, particularly from state actors such as Russia and China, remains one of the greatest challenges for the transatlantic community. Hybrid threats have gained more traction among policymakers and publics across Europe and the United States, especially in a world with COVID-19. Over the last five years, Euro-Atlantic nations and institutions, such as NATO and the European Union (EU), have taken important steps to respond to hybrid issues. But, as hybrid threats become more prominent in the future, policymakers must move toward a more coherent, effective, and proactive strategy for countering Russian and Chinese hybrid threats. To develop such a transatlantic counter-hybrid strategy for Russia and China, this paper argues that two major things need to happen. First, transatlantic policymakers have to build a common strategic concept to guide collective thinking on hybrid threats. Second, transatlantic policymakers need to take a range of practical actions in service of that strategic concept. In a strategic concept for countering Russian and Chinese hybrid threats, Lauren Speranza offers five strategic priorities that could form the basis of this strategic concept and presents a series of constructive steps that NATO, the EU, and nations can take, in cooperation with the private sector and civil society, to enhance their counter-hybrid capabilities against Russia and China.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Politics, Science and Technology, European Union, Innovation, Resilience, and Non-Traditional Threats
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Eurasia, and Asia