A new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has urged the U.S. government to fundamentally rethink how it protects its technological edge. The report emphasizes that the country must move beyond simply shielding specific technologies from foreign access and instead adopt a comprehensive risk management approach that strengthens America’s ability to innovate in a rapidly changing global landscape.
The authors of the study argue that traditional strategies—focused mainly on restricting knowledge transfer or blocking competitors from obtaining key technologies—are no longer sufficient. Instead, they recommend that the federal government prioritize protecting the systems and infrastructure that enable continuous innovation.
“Because the global landscape of technology and competition is shifting so dramatically, guarding individual technologies alone is not only inadequate, it can often be counterproductive,” said Susan Gordon, former Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence and co-chair of the report committee. “The United States must focus on fortifying its capacity to innovate if it wants to respond effectively to military, commercial, and technological challenges.”
Rethinking the U.S. Innovation Framework
The report urges policymakers to ensure that as much scientific research as possible remains within an open environment. According to the authors, openness in research fosters international collaboration, attracts top scientific talent, and accelerates the development of new discoveries that underpin economic and national strength. To achieve this, the committee recommends that the President issue an executive order reaffirming the U.S. commitment to open science while balancing national security needs.
However, the report also cautions that not all research can or should be public. It calls for a coordinated interagency process to identify areas of strategic vulnerability, evaluate the associated risks, and develop strategies to mitigate potential threats. This balance, the authors suggest, will allow the U.S. to maintain a robust research ecosystem without compromising its competitive edge.
Why the Old Model No Longer Works
For decades, America’s strategy for safeguarding its technological dominance was rooted in a straightforward concept: protect critical technologies from being shared, sold, or stolen. This approach, effective during the Cold War era, worked when technological development was slower, more isolated, and primarily within the military-industrial complex.
But the 21st-century research environment has changed dramatically. The boundary between commercial and military technology is now almost nonexistent, and innovations in the private sector increasingly drive advances in defense, space, and artificial intelligence. Modern science is global, interconnected, and multidisciplinary—making it virtually impossible to wall off entire technologies without disrupting innovation chains.
The report highlights that many breakthrough technologies today depend on vast enabling systems such as 5G networks, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence platforms. Restricting these systems would not only hinder competitors but also slow domestic progress. In some cases, overregulation could harm U.S. companies and researchers more than it deters foreign rivals.
A More Complex Global Rivalry
The new challenge, the report says, lies in the evolving competitive landscape—particularly in relation to China. Over the last two decades, China has emerged as the United States’ most formidable technological rival. Backed by massive investments in research and development and a workforce three times the size of the U.S. labor pool, China has made strategic moves to dominate key sectors including semiconductors, renewable energy, and artificial intelligence.
The report notes that China employs a variety of methods to gain access to advanced technology: acquiring foreign firms, recruiting global experts through talent programs, and engaging in intellectual property theft. Moreover, the authors warn that America’s own reaction to these actions—often through bureaucratic controls and slow-moving regulatory processes—can unintentionally hinder its ability to innovate.
“Each time the U.S. builds new layers of restrictions, it risks trapping its own scientific community in red tape,” the study warns. “The result is a research environment that discourages collaboration, delays progress, and makes the U.S. less attractive to top global talent.”
The Cost of Overregulation
The report underscores a growing concern within the American research community: the rising number of complex rules governing scientific work. Over the past decade, U.S. researchers have faced a surge in administrative burdens, from export controls to disclosure requirements, all designed to protect sensitive technologies. While these policies aim to strengthen national security, they often have unintended consequences—slowing down collaboration, limiting data sharing, and discouraging foreign participation in U.S.-based research.
Patrick Gallagher, Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh and co-chair of the committee, warned that these trends could backfire. “In today’s global R&D ecosystem, risks cannot be managed through isolation. Doing so only creates a new kind of danger—the danger of stifling innovation and diminishing America’s competitive advantage.”
Gallagher emphasized that true technological security does not come from walls or restrictions, but from maintaining a vibrant, fast-moving research culture capable of adapting to new challenges.
Building a Resilient Innovation Ecosystem
The report offers several recommendations to help the United States strengthen its innovation base while managing risks tied to critical technologies. These include:
- Encouraging open collaboration in science and engineering wherever possible.
- Creating a unified interagency framework to assess emerging threats and vulnerabilities.
- Reducing redundant administrative barriers that slow down research.
- Investing in education and workforce development to ensure a steady pipeline of scientific talent.
- Enhancing coordination between government, academia, and the private sector to accelerate innovation.
The study also calls for federal agencies to improve communication and transparency when setting policies related to technology transfer, foreign collaboration, and data sharing. Instead of reactive restrictions, the committee suggests a proactive approach—anticipating future challenges and developing flexible risk-mitigation strategies.
The Broader Mission
The report, titled “Protecting Critical Technologies for National Security in an Era of Openness and Competition,” was conducted by a committee sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Both agencies have long played pivotal roles in fostering groundbreaking research that has shaped the modern technological era—from the early internet to advanced satellite systems.
Founded under an 1863 congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine operate as independent, nonprofit institutions. Their mission is to provide objective, evidence-based analysis to guide U.S. public policy in science, technology, and medicine.
A Strategic Pivot for America’s Future
As global competition intensifies, the report’s message is clear: the United States cannot protect its technological leadership simply by building higher walls around specific innovations. Instead, it must nurture an agile, resilient ecosystem that continually generates new ideas faster than competitors can replicate them.
The path forward, according to the authors, lies in balance—protecting the nation’s strategic interests without suffocating its creative spirit. Ensuring that America remains the world’s center of scientific discovery will depend not on secrecy, but on sustained investment in open collaboration, education, and the freedom to explore.
“Leadership in science and technology has always been the backbone of America’s global influence,” the report concludes. “To maintain that leadership, the United States must protect what truly matters—not individual technologies, but the capacity to innovate.”
Leave a Reply