Reports & Briefings

How China’s systematic campaign to dominate strategically important industries threatens America’s technological leadership, economic strength, and national security—and what U.S. policymakers should do about it.

The most important techno-economic policy issue America faces is how its economic system should operate and be governed. The answer is neither market capitalism nor societal capitalism nor socialism. Only national economic power capitalism can provide the framework necessary to avoid losing the techno-economic war to China.

WRC-27 is an opportunity for the United States to advance global space and spectrum policies that promote productivity and innovation, build support for American priorities, and counter foreign efforts to undermine U.S. leadership in space and terrestrial wireless communications.

The U.S. government lacks adequate capabilities to conduct the kind of techno-economic industrial analysis that is necessary to avoid losing to China, nor is it organized to formulate and manage industrial and competitiveness strategies, policies, and programs in an enterprise-wide way. Policymakers must address these gaps to mobilize America’s economic power industries.

KFTC enforcement data suggests de facto bias against leading American technology companies. Given this record, U.S. policymakers should demand fair treatment for U.S. firms, and South Korean policymakers should reconsider expanding the KFTC’s authority over online platforms.

For policymakers to bolster regional competitiveness in the global economy, they first must know where they stand. This report—coauthored by ITIF and the Institute for Competitiveness, India—benchmarks the 87 regions of India and the United States using 12 commonly available indicators of strength in the knowledge economy, globalization, and innovation capacity.

Orbital data centers could complement terrestrial infrastructure by processing selected workloads in space, particularly where data is generated in orbit. Their value will depend on technical performance, life cycle economics, market demand, and a regulatory environment that does not hinder testing and deployment.

The U.S. regulatory state has become a major headwind for national economic power industries competing against China, and incremental reforms will not be enough for America to avoid techno-economic defeat. U.S. policymakers need to adopt a national developmentalist model.

South Korea’s AI-memory boom proves that it can still lead at the technological frontier. The proposed Future Response Fund and national megaprojects will test whether South Korea can turn that lead into stronger suppliers, exportable capabilities, and allied scale before Chinese expansion narrows its industrial base.

A survey among 32 think tank members of the Global Trade and Innovation Policy Alliance (GTIPA) across 25 countries finds strong optimism about technological progress, but much less confidence in the global policy environment. Respondents are bullish on emerging technologies and skeptical of recent trade changes, and broadly favor skills and trade openness.