, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 199–214 | Cite as

Recent Developments in China–U.S. Cooperation in Science

  • Caroline S. Wagner
  • Lutz Bornmann
  • Loet Leydesdorff


China’s remarkable gains in science over the past 25 years have been well documented but it is less well known that China and the United States have become each other’s top collaborating country. Science and technology has been a primary vehicle for growing the bilateral relationship between China and the United States since the opening of relations between the two countries in the late 1970s. During the early 2000s, the scientific relationship between China and the United States—as measured in coauthored papers—showed significant growth (Jin et al. in Journal of Shanxi University 30(2):295–302, 2007). Chinese scientists claim first authorship much more frequently than U.S. counterparts by the end of the decade. The sustained rate of increase of collaboration with one other country is unprecedented on the U.S. side. Even growth in relations with eastern European nations does not match the growth in the relationship between China and the United States. Both countries can benefit from the relationship, but for the U.S., greater benefit would come from a more targeted strategy.


China United States Research and development Science Science policy Global relations Russia 


  1. Acs, Zoltan J., David B. Audretsch, and Maryann P. Feldman. 2006. R&D spillovers and innovative activity. Managerial and Decision Economics 15(2): 131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, Jonathan. 2010. Get ready for China’s domination of science. New Scientist, 6 Jan., P. 2742.Google Scholar
  3. Archambault, Eric. 2010. Thirty Years in Science: Secular Movements in Knowledge Creation. Report,
  4. Arunachalam, Sidharth, R. Srinivasan, and V. Raman. 1994. International collaboration in science: Participation by the Asian giants. Scientometrics 30(1): 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonaccorsi, Andrea, and Juan Vargas. 2010. Proliferation dynamics in new sciences. Research Policy 39(8): 1034–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bornmann, Lutz, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2011. Which cities produce worldwide excellent papers more than can be expected? A new mapping approach-Using Google Maps-based on statistical significance testing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62(10): 1954–1962.Google Scholar
  7. Bornmann, Lutz, Caroline Wagner, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2015. BRICS countries and scientific excellence: A bibliometric analysis of most frequently-cited papers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST). doi: 10.1002/asi.23333.
  8. Branstetter, Lee, Guangwei Li, and Francisco Veloso. 2013. The Globalization of R&D: China, India, and the Rise of international Co-invention. Informal paper.
  9. Braun, T. 2005. Keeping the gates of science journals: Gatekeeping indicators of national performance in the sciences. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S & T systems, eds. H.F. Moed, W. Glänzel and U. Schmoch, 95–114. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Braun, T., and I. Dióspatonyi. 2005. The counting of core journal gatekeepers as science indicators really counts. The scientific scope of action and strength of nations. Scientometrics 62(3): 297–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cargill, Margaret, and Patrick O’Connor. 2006. Developing Chinese scientists’ skills for publishing in English: Evaluating collaborating-colleague workshops based on genre analysis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5(3): 207–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cao, Cong, Richard P. Suttmeier, and Denis F. Simon. 2006. China’s 15-year Science and Technology Plan. Physics Today 59(12): 38.Google Scholar
  13. Cassiolato, Jose Eduardo, and Helena M. Lastres. 2011. Science, technology and innovation policies in the BRICS countries: An introduction. In BRICS and development alternatives: Innovation systems and policies, eds. José Eduardo Cassiolato and Virginia Vitorino, 1–34. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
  14. Costas, Rodrigo, and Isabel Iribarren-Maestro. 2007. Variations in content and format of ISI databases in their different versions: The case of the Science Citation Index in CD-ROM and the Web of Science. Scientometrics 72(2): 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen, David. 2011. China’s Program for Science and Technology Modernization: Implications for American competitiveness. Centra technologies report for the U.S.–China Economic and Security Review Commission.Google Scholar
  16. Duque, Ricardo B., Marcus Ynalvez, Paul Mbatia, R. Sooryamoorthy, Dan-Bright Dzorgbo, and Wesley Shrum. 2005. Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the Internet, and problems of research in developing areas. Social Studies of Science 35(5): 755–785.Google Scholar
  17. Freeman, Richard B. 2006. Does globalization of the scientific/engineering workforce threaten US economic leadership? In Innovation policy and the economy, vol. 6, eds. Adam B. Jaffe, Josh Lerner, and Scott Stern, 123–158. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Fu, Hui-Zhen, and Yuh-Shan Ho. 2013. Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011. Journal of Informetrics 7(1): 210–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gao, Jian, and Gary H. Jefferson. 2007. Science and technology take-off in China? Sources of rising R&D intensity. Asia Pacific Business Review 13(3): 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glänzel, Wolfgang, Andreas Schubert, and H.J. Czerwon. 1999. A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union (1985–1995). Scientometrics 45(2): 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glänzel, Wolfgang, and Andreas Schubert. 2001. Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics 50(2): 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. He, Tianwei. 2009. International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries. Scientometrics 80(3): 571–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Institute of International Education. 2014. Open doors report, 2013. Accessed 13 April 2014.
  24. Jin, Bihui, and Ronald Rousseau. 2005a. Evaluation of research performance and scientometric indicators in China. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research, eds. Henk F. Moed, Wolfgang Glänzel, and Ulrich Schmoch, 497–514. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jin, Bihui, and Ronald Rousseau. 2005b. China’s quantitative expansion phase: Exponential growth but low impact. In Proceedings of ISSI 2005 (Ingwersen & Larsen, eds.), 362–370.Google Scholar
  26. Jin, Bihui, Richard P. Suttmeier, Z. Wang, Cong Cao, D. Wang, and Q. Zhou. 2007. Sino–U.S. science collaboration: An analysis in bibliometrics. Journal of Shanxi University (Natural Science Edition) 30(2): 295–302.Google Scholar
  27. Jin, Xioming. 2003. China–US Relations in Science, Conference Paper. Accessed April 2014.
  28. Katz, J. Sylvan, and Ben R. Martin. 1997. What is research collaboration? Research Policy 26(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
  29. Klavans, Richard, and Kevin W. Boyack. 2009. Toward a consensus map of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60(3): 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kostoff, R.N. 2008. Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance. Journal of Informetrics 2(4): 354–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leydesdorff, Loet, and Caroline S. Wagner. 2008. International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Informetrics 2(4): 317–325.Google Scholar
  32. Leydesdorff, Loet, Caroline S. Wagner, and Lutz Bornmann. 2014. The European Union, China, and the United States in the Top-1% and Top-10% Layers of Most-Frequently-Cited Publications: Competition and collaborations. Journal of Informetrics 8(3): 606–617.Google Scholar
  33. Lin, Songqing. 2013. Why serious academic fraud occurs in China. Learned Publishing 26(1): 24–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Narin, Francis, K. Stevens, and Edith S. Whitlow. 1991. Scientific co-operation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers. Scientometrics 21(3): 313–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. National Science Board. 2000. Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  36. National Science Board. 2010. Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  37. National Science Board. 2012. Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  38. National Science Board. 2014. Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  39. OECD. 2008, Main science and technology indicators, vol. 2008/1. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  40. Pentland, W. 2011. Congress Bans Scientific Collaboration with China, Cites High Espionage Risks. Forbes, May 7, 2011. Accessed April 2014.Google Scholar
  41. Rafols, Ismael, Alan Porter, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2010. Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61(9): 1871–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Royal Society. 2011. Knowledge, networks, and nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century. London: Royal Society.Google Scholar
  43. Shelton, R.D., and Loet Leydesdorff. 2012. Publish or patent: Bibliometric evidence for empirical trade-offs in national funding strategies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(3): 498–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shelton, Robert Duane, and Patricia Foland. 2009. The race for world leadership of science and technology: status and forecasts. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, pp. 369–380.Google Scholar
  45. Springut, Micah, Stephen Schlaikjer, and David Chen. 2011. China’s Program for Science and Technology Modernization: Implications for American Competitiveness: Prepared for the US–China Economic and Security Review Commission. CENTRA Technology.Google Scholar
  46. Sun, Fuquan. 2012. International Science and Technology Cooperation of China: Evolution, Progress and Achievements, Problems and Prospects. Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, internal paper.Google Scholar
  47. Suttmeier, Richard P. 2008. State, self-organization, and identity in the building of Sino–US cooperation in science and technology. Asian Perspective 32(1): 5–31.Google Scholar
  48. Suttmeier, Richard P. 2010. From Cold War science diplomacy to partnering in a networked world: 30 years of Sino–US relations in science and technology. Journal of Science and Technology Policy in China 1(1): 18–28.Google Scholar
  49. Tang, Li, and Philip Shapira. 2011. China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics 88(1): 1–16.Google Scholar
  50. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2010. UNESCO science report 2010. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  51. Van Leeuwen, T.N., Henk Moed, Robert Tijssen, M.S. Visser, and Ton van Raan. 2000. First evidence of serious language-bias in the use of citation analysis for the evaluation of national science systems. Research Evaluation 9(2): 155–156.Google Scholar
  52. Wagner, Caroline S., Irene Brahmakulam, D.J. Peterson, Linda Staheli, and Anny Wong. 2002. U.S. Government funding of science and technology cooperation with Russia. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
  53. Wagner, Caroline, and Loet Leydesdorff. (in preparation). Implications for U.S. science policy of the growth of global science.Google Scholar
  54. Wagner, Caroline S., and Shing Kit Wong. 2012. Unseen science? Representation of BRICs in global science. Scientometrics 90(3): 1001–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilsdon, James, and J. Keeley. 2007. China: The next science superpower. London: Demos.Google Scholar
  56. Zhou, Ping. 2013. The growth momentum of China in producing international scientific publications seems to have slowed down. Information Processing and Management 49: 1049–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhou, Ping, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2006. The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy 35(1): 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhou, Ping, Bart Thijs, and Wolfgang Glänzel. 2009. Is China also becoming a giant in social sciences? Scientometrics 79(3): 593–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caroline S. Wagner
    • 1
  • Lutz Bornmann
    • 2
  • Loet Leydesdorff
    • 3
  1. 1.Milton & Roslyn Wolf Chair in International Affairs, John Glenn School of Public Affairs, Battelle Center for Science and Technology PolicyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Division for Science and Innovation StudiesAdministrative Headquarters of the Max Planck SocietyMunichGermany
  3. 3.Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations