Recalibrating the course: the Biden administration’s strategy for science, technology and innovation

0Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Against the backdrop of anti-globalization and intensified geopolitical competition, the Biden administration has become more aware of the deficiency of the U.S. innovation system and raised more strategic concerns about external competition. To address the problems at home and abroad, the Biden administration is formulating a grand and comprehensive agenda for science, technology and innovation, including all stages from basic science to technological invention and then to innovation development, hoping to use state logic to “correct” market logic. In the era of technological revolution, the goals of Biden’s agenda are to reshape the domestic innovation environment and the international technology competition landscape, to consolidate the foundation for maintaining U.S. hegemony in science and technology, and to recalibrate the course for U.S. science and technology development. The practical implementation of Biden’s policies has already produced tangible results but it also faces enormous challenges. Although it may be too early to forecast the trajectory of the U.S. innovation ecosystem over the next 75 years, current initiatives are notably steering towards a strategic balance among national security, economic interests, and research and development efficiency. The transformation of the U.S. strategy for science, technology and innovation presents complex and severe challenges to China’s development of cutting-edge technologies and the safeguarding of its technology security. In response, China will need to contemplate and devise an effective strategy to remain competitive with the U.S. in the high-tech industries.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhao, J. (2023). Recalibrating the course: the Biden administration’s strategy for science, technology and innovation. China International Strategy Review, 5(2), 274–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42533-023-00147-0

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free