Search

Begin New Search Topic Science and Technology Political Geography United States of America

91. The Human Perils of Scaling Smart Technologies: Evidence from Field Experiments

Author:
Alec Brandon, Christopher M. Clapp, John A. List, Robert D. Metcalfe, and Michael Price
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Economists have long argued that an essential driver of economic growth is innovation. Past work has shown that differences in production technologies represent an important source of disparities in patterns of long‐​run economic growth across countries. For instance, some estimates suggest that roughly 50 percent of growth in U.S. annual gross domestic product can be attributed to innovation. Not surprisingly, policymakers have thus focused significant attention on policies designed to stimulate innovation and the supply of new technologies. Yet innovation includes not only the creation but also the diffusion of new technologies and products in the marketplace.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economic Growth, and Innovation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

92. US-Singapore: Advancing Technological Collaboration and Innovation in Southeast Asia

Author:
Mark Manantan, Manoj Harjani, Andreas Kuehn, Courtney Weatherby, and Natalie Pang
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
In this special publication, authors were encouraged to reflect on what stronger US and Singapore cooperation looks like in concrete policy terms amid ongoing geopolitical volatility. Beyond the technical and geopolitical perspectives, the contributions in this edited volume emphasize the importance of cross-sectoral collaboration and sustainability for an enduring US-Singapore strategic partnership.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Asia, Singapore, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

93. Germany’s Economic Security and Technology: Optimizing Export Control, Investment Screening and Market Access Instruments

Author:
Tyson Barker and David Hagebölling
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Technological development and increasingly fraught US-China competition have geopolitical consequences for technology access. The erosion of post-Cold War multilateral dual-use technology export control regimes, such as the Wassenaar Arrangement, and investment and other control frameworks have led to na-tional, EU, and ad hoc measures, such as the restrictions on Russian semiconductor access following the invasion of Ukraine. The German government must integrate technology access and control instruments – export controls, FDI screening, critical infrastructure access, research protection, and outbound investment– in its Digital Strategy and National Security Strategy. The former currently neglects critical technology access and control; the latter must address it comprehensively. German – and EU – dual-use export and FDI screening reforms have been updated and are now in place. Capacity building and alignment with EU and NATO partners now deserves greater attention. Measures could include more robust, institutionalized information-sharing and consultations on dual-use technology export, import, investment, and research controls in a Multilateral Technology Control Committee born out of the G7 or TTC. The commit-tee should also establish the capacity to deny end-user access to German technology through its own Foreign-Direct Product Rules and Entity List.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Science and Technology, Investment, and Exports
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

94. New Opportunities for the United States-Kingdom of Thailand Alliance in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Lance D. Jackson
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
In March 2022, the East-West Center in Washington (EWCW), in collaboration with the Royal Thai Embassy, Washington, DC, convened a two-day seminar in which experts from Thailand and the United States discussed issues and opportunities for the US-Thailand alliance. The workshop included a diverse array of discussants hailing from government, military, academic, think tank, and private sector backgrounds. This report, which adheres to the “Chatham House Rule” under which observations referred to in the report are not attributed to any individual participant, is a summary of the group discussions and the key themes from the seminar. The recent signing of the United States-Thailand Communique on Strategic Alliance and Partnership and a memorandum of understanding (MOU) focused on promoting supply chain resilience on July 10, 2022, highlight the pertinence of this report and the associated seminar. The topics detailed in this report aligned with many of the pressing issues addressed in the Communique and MOU, including expanding law enforcement cooperation, deepening cybersecurity collaboration, supporting resilient transportation corridors, advancing military modernization, and catalyzing Thailand’s bio-circular-green (BCG) economy. The report also covered topics and key themes from a series of jointly produced public webinars and an Asia Pacific Bulletin series of policy briefs on US-Thai affairs.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Population, Leadership, Public Health, and Travel
Political Geography:
Asia, North America, Thailand, Southeast Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

95. Remaking the Future of the Internet

Author:
James Lewis
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
A rule of thumb in Hollywood is when you have no new ideas for a 1lm, remake an old one. 5e United States is taking a similar approach to internet policy, with the well-intended “Declaration for the Future of the Internet” (hereafter referred to as “the Declaration”) reiterating themes from the dawn of the internet.1 5ere is a real opportunity for a new approach to internet policy that endorses democratic values and a reformed multistakeholder model, but the Declaration does not provide this opportunity because it ignores sovereignty and great power con6ict—the forces reshaping the internet. 5ere are 193 countries in the world. Only 60 endorsed the Declaration.2 If this had been an election, the United States would have lost. 5is outcome may partly re6ect a lack of diplomatic skill by the United States, but it also re6ects a paucity of ideas to address concerns in the developing world, which center around development, sovereignty, and the rule of law. Many nations would have welcomed a bold new vision for the internet that took their interests into account. 5ey did not get this vision from the Declaration.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Internet, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

96. The Strength of Small, Lean, and Agile

Author:
Brian Binnie
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
As a youngster, the 1960s wereexciting times for space exploration. In 1968, I watched Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, a movie that sparked the minds of young adventurers everywhere. Just one year later, in 1969, I watched alongside the world as two men bounced around on the moon. With millions of others, I believed that since everything was happening so quickly, by the time we were older, there would be all sorts of opportunities available in the burgeoning 1eld of space. 9ese expectations were never realized. For 45 years, the same starry adventurers watched from the sidelines as the severed operations of NASA maintained their exclusive grip on all things space with the Shuttle and International Space Station operations. But in 2004, a small, privately owned company shocked the landscape, 0ying three space 0ights with a reusable ship to the rapt attention of millions worldwide. With the visibility provided by a $10 million prize, these 0ights became the leading story of that year.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Regulation, Space, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Political Geography:
United States of America

97. The U.S.-China Battle for Semiconductor Supremacy and Reshaping of Global Supply Chain

Author:
Hyung-gon Jeong
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The realization of digital transformation (DX) and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) has led to the development of new technologies in areas such as AI, big data, metaverse, autonomous vehicles, digital currency, and blockchain technology. While these sectors are expected to continue to grow, major countries including the United States and China are fiercely competing to secure a global supply chain for the semiconductor industry. Built on free trade, the global division of production in the semiconductor industry has driven corporate innovation and technology development. However, the trend of technological nationalism and countries’ efforts to build a value chain within their territory are expected to hurt the global semiconductor industry. The ever-deepening hegemony competition between the U.S. and China in the semiconductor industry could have a profound impact not only on the Korean economy but also on a restructuring of the global semiconductor supply chain. This study analyzes the supply chain structure and risks of the Korean semiconductor industry, along with U.S. and Chinese policies to foster the semiconductor industry, going on to explore corresponding countermeasures.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Supply Chains, Semiconductors, and Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

98. Genomes: The Era of Purposeful Manipulation Begins

Author:
Carol Kuntz
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
The purposeful manipulation of genomes is now possible. Such manipulation has great promise and broad strategic implications; it is creating useful molecules of various sorts and, over time, it could eliminate genetic disease. Like many emerging technologies, genome manipulation could grow into an important economic sector, contributing to a replicating cycle of innovation and enabling the United States to favorably shape its strategic future at home and abroad. Advances in these technologies are fueled by a global commercial and academic community. The United States should ensure that it fully remains a member of that community, but also that key capabilities—such as large, well-curated databases and biofoundries—are created and sustained domestically. The United States needs to rationalize its policy on heritable human genome editing, allowing legitimate types of edits but contributing to international norms against illegitimate ones. A robust biotechnology sector at home would yield many benefits—economic, technological, medical—and provide the critical reservoir of expertise within which national security interests could be secured. The Department of Defense needs to make structural reforms in its approach to emerging technologies, particularly by creating career paths for uniformed practitioners. Otherwise, it will continue failing in its effort to incorporate emerging technologies into its operational concepts, budgets, and programs—leading to diminished capabilities in the United States, particularly as compared to China. In time, falling behind on these key areas of science could lead to many problems, including failures in deterrence and, ultimately, in war.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, and Medicine
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

99. Reshoring Semiconductor Manufacturing: Addressing the Workforce Challenge

Author:
Sujai Shivakumar, Charles Wessner, and Thomas Howell
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
On August 9, 2022, President Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act, sweeping legislation that seeks to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor supply chain, encourage investments in semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the United States, stimulate semiconductor research and development (R&D), and disincentivize U.S. investments in chip-making plants in China. Among other things, the legislation will provide $52.7 billion in federal outlays over five years for loans, loan guarantees, grants, and other financial support for domestic chip-making investments, as well as a 25 percent tax credit for semiconductor investments in the United States. Bolstered by this unprecedented level of federal support, six major chip makers are investing in new wafer fabrication facilities (“fabs”) in the United States: Intel, Samsung, TSMC, GlobalFoundries, Texas Instruments, and Micron Technology.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Manufacturing, Industrialization, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

100. Choking off China’s Access to the Future of AI

Author:
Gregory Allen
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
On October 7, 2022, the Biden administration announced a new export controls policy on artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductor technologies to China. These new controls—a genuine landmark in U.S.-China relations—provide the complete picture after a partial disclosure in early September generated confusion. For weeks the Biden administration has been receiving criticism in many quarters for a new round of semiconductor export control restrictions, first disclosed on September 1. The restrictions block leading U.S. AI computer chip designers, such as Nvidia and AMD, from selling their high-end chips for AI and supercomputing to China. The criticism typically goes like this: China’s domestic AI chip design companies could not win customers in China because their chip designs could not compete with Nvidia and AMD on performance. Chinese firms could not catch up to Nvidia and AMD on performance because they did not have enough customers to benefit from economies of scale and network effects. Because of the new export controls, revenues that formerly flowed to U.S. chip companies will now go to Chinese chip companies, offering a viable path to economies of scale and competitive performance. In the short term, this policy will significantly harm Chinese AI data center companies. However, blocking U.S. AI chip designers from selling their world-leading chips is actually good for China in the longer term because it will strengthen China’s domestic chip design ecosystem. While the reasoning in this criticism is sound, it does not imply that the Biden administration’s actions are self-defeating. Rather, it shows how the policy as disclosed in September was incomplete. A policy like this would not make sense if that is the only step the administration planned to take. Clearly something was missing, and industry experts have been waiting for the other shoe to drop ever since. On October 7, the other shoe dropped. The Biden administration announced a massive policy shift on semiconductor exports to China as well as revised rules for how the lists of restricted parties are managed. In recent decades, U.S. semiconductor policy has been primarily market driven and laissez faire. With the new policy, which comes on the heels of the CHIPS Act’s passage, the United States is firmly focused on retaining control over so-called “chokepoint” (or as it is sometimes translated from Chinese “stranglehold”) technologies in the global semiconductor technology supply chain. The most important chokepoints in the context of this discussion are AI chip designs, electronic design automation software, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and equipment components. The Biden administration’s latest actions simultaneously exploit U.S. dominance across all four of these chokepoints. In doing so, these actions demonstrate an unprecedented degree of U.S. government intervention to not only preserve chokepoint control but also begin a new U.S. policy of actively strangling large segments of the Chinese technology industry—strangling with an intent to kill.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Hegemony, Artificial Intelligence, Rivalry, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America