A contrarian analysis of how the United States can succeed in the technological race with Asia.

Adam Segal says we must look toward China and India as models for competition in "disruptive innovation."

Adam Segal argues that the future of U.S. competitiveness lies not just in trying to beat China by the numbers, but on strengthening American social, political, and cultural institutions that support innovation.

Adam Segal says that no matter what, China and India will train more scientists and engineers than the United States, but the United States has the best environment for ideas to grow.

Adam Segal and Cherian Samuel argue that both India and the United States have a stake in an internet that is open, global, and secure.

The impact of the standoff between Google and China, argue Adam Segal and Robert K. Knake, may have less to do with censorship and more to do with the nature of technological development.

Adam Segal argues that while, "China's cyberaggression doesn't mean that the United States should stop all attempts at engagement," the goal of an open and transparent Web may not be realistic.

As part of a larger publication, assessing the effectiveness of the economic stimulus, Michael Levi and Adam Segal write that the Department of Energy is pursuing a "prudent and sound" strategy for investing their share. The more pressing concern, according to Levi and Segal, is that Congress may forgo funding the department in favor of more "politically attractive" options.

This workshop was part of the Roundtable Series on Cyberconflict and Cybersecurity, organized by the Cyberconflict and Cybersecurity Initiative.

This study examines low-carbon technology innovation and absorption in China, India, and Brazil. It recommends a course for U.S. policy that promotes accelerated innovation and adoption of new technologies while protecting U.S. commercial interests.