Author
Listed:
- Qin Lin
(School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai, China;
Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA. isqinlin@gmail.com)
Abstract
The China–US Tech Competition has become a focal point of current international research. In the context of this technological competition, Europe faces the challenge of determining its positioning. As a significant force influencing European policy direction, the perspectives of European think tanks on the China–US technology competition deserve considerable attention from the academic and policy communities. This study examines research findings from eight prominent European think tanks as the sample and employs literature analysis approach to interpret the origins, impacts and prospects of the China–US technology competition from the viewpoint of European think tanks. Additionally, the study assesses Europe’s policy orientation within this technological rivalry. The research indicates that European think tanks are dedicated to providing comprehensive and objective information and recommendations to European decision-makers. Overall, European think tanks adopt a relatively neutral stance on the China–US technology competition, which may reflect certain resistance to the United States’ efforts to create a technological coalition against China by courting Europe. Looking ahead, it is crucial to further investigate the perspectives of European think tanks on the China–US technology competition in order to promote a clearer positioning of Europe’s role and responsibilities within this intense competition. Additionally, conducting research from a third-party perspective will help us gain a comprehensive understanding of the global impact of the China–US technology competition and Europe’s position and role in this context.
Suggested Citation
Qin Lin, 2024.
"Navigating the Technological Tug-of-war: European Think Tanks’ Perspectives on the China–US Tech Competition,"
China Report, , vol. 60(3), pages 250-265, August.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:chnrpt:v:60:y:2024:i:3:p:250-265
DOI: 10.1177/00094455241288065
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:chnrpt:v:60:y:2024:i:3:p:250-265. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.