Ithaka S+R is tracking federal policies in the United States that affect US–Sino academic collaboration as part of our Supporting International Values in the Research Enterprise project, funded by the Henry Luce Foundation. The tracker documents the developing rules, restrictions, and guidance that govern how scientific collaboration across borders can take place. Our aim for this tracker is to provide a resource from which university administrators, researchers, and advocates, can draw out broader patterns and develop coherent strategies that sustain rigorous and dynamic research for the global good in an increasingly constrained international environment. Beyond introducing the tracker, this blog also hopes to provide more context for its necessity.

A brief history of the international dimensions in the US research enterprise

For decades, the research enterprise in the United States was both a driver and beneficiary of liberal internationalism.[1] Following the end of World War II, international scientific collaboration, economic competitiveness, and national security interests became broadly aligned. Over time, international research collaborations steadily increased and evolved, particularly in the years between 1990 and 2020. Despite geopolitical tensions and military operations, international science and research collaborations continued, at times becoming diplomatic instruments themselves as they were the last channels of exchange after other political relationships had frayed. Indeed, universities and governments frequently positioned science as a domain capable of transcending political differences, and in the United States, cultural and national pluralism were held up as mutually reinforcing assets to institutional prestige, national security, and global scientific progress.

During this period, the US research environment enjoyed comparatively high levels of academic freedom, creating conditions that, as a recent study suggests, helped develop an ecosystem where international research collaborations could flourish. Many of the world’s leading researchers moved to the US and built their careers at US institutions, and US-based scholars in turn collaborated with their research counterparts abroad. Federal agencies, university leaders, and scholarly associations actively encouraged international collaboration, seeing it as a catalyst for improving the quality of research and strengthening the US position as a global leader of science and technology research and development. For researchers, collaborating across borders made their grant proposals more competitive, strengthened promotion and tenure cases, and bestowed distinction through international co-authorship. In this context, global engagement was understood to be integral to academic development, the public mission of US research universities, and to broader national priorities.

A changing landscape

This shifted considerably in 2018 when heightened federal attention to the possibility of undue foreign influence within the US research ecosystem elevated research security as a policy priority, marking a turning point in the international dimensions of US academic research. Since then, federal policies focused on securitization such as the China Initiative and the National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) have increasingly limited who can conduct research, which technologies can be exported, which countries researchers may come from, which grants ultimately receive federal funding, and who is eligible to receive that funding. This steady accumulation of policies appear to be fundamentally reshaping the ecosystem that cultivates international scientific collaboration. As a result, the flow of people, knowledge, and technology in and out of the US in the name of advancing science, once considered almost a certainty, has slowed significantly.

Over the past year in particular, both the pace and the consequences of policy changes have accelerated and come into sharper view. New export controls, updated federal grant requirements, restrictions on certain collaborations, visa uncertainties, and agency-specific guidance have had far-reaching effects. Hiring decisions, graduate student recruitment, data-sharing practices, conference participation, and the informal networks that have long animated academic discovery can no longer be assumed to be routine elements of academic life. Immigration policy now intersects directly with research security reviews. Developments in AI governance and US–China technological competition are unfolding alongside, and often in direct relationship to, changes in science policy.

The US research enterprise is thus in a fraught state of flux. As the conditions that once nurtured international collaboration have shifted, so too have the relationships among researchers, universities, and the federal government. While international engagement remains a defining feature of the global research enterprise, the terms under which US based researchers are able to participate are being reshaped. Understanding the history of these terms, how they are evolving, and the discussion around them is important for those navigating the current research landscape.

Because China occupies a central position in this evolving landscape, our US–China Policy Tracker focuses on actions that impact Chinese researchers working in the United States and US-based researchers collaborating with China-based institutions. However, many of the policies impact international scholars writ large as well as US scholars and institutions working with international partners. We will continue to update this tracker and are hoping to learn more about how it is being used. We welcome your feedback and invite you to send questions, comments, and suggestions for additions to Ruby.MacDougall@Ithaka.org.

[1] Broadly defined, liberal internationalism, is a cluster of ideas derived from the belief that international progress is possible, where progress is defined as movement toward increasing levels of harmonious cooperation between political communities. (Britannica)

About the Henry Luce Foundation

The Henry Luce Foundation seeks to deepen knowledge and understanding in pursuit of a more democratic and just world. Established in 1936 by Henry R. Luce, the co-founder and editor-in-chief of Time, Inc., the Luce Foundation advances its mission by nurturing knowledge communities and institutions, fostering dialogue across divides, enriching public discourse, amplifying diverse voices, and investing in leadership development.