National approaches to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security

Aim. The work aimed to substantiate national approaches to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security using the examples of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the United States of America (USA) in the context of digital economy development.

Objectives. The work seeks to examine issues of ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security in the context of digital economy development; to analyze and systematize the factors, characteristics, and challenges of digital economy development using the examples of the PRC and the USA; to develop a framework for defining national approaches to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security; and to substantiate national approaches to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security using the examples of the PRC and the USA.

Methods. The study was based on theoretical research in the field of economic digitalization, economic security, and innovative and technological development in individual countries, as well as empirical studies in the fields of digitalization, scientific, industrial, and technological development using the examples of the PRC and the USA, within the context of their international political and economic ties. The authors employed general scientific methods of systemic, comparative, functional, statistical, and causal analysis, as well as systematization, abstraction, and generalization.

Results. The PRC and the USA are identified as global leaders in technological and digital development, while their influence extends beyond national borders. China’s national approach to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security in the context of developing a digital economy is characterized by an industrial model of integration into international scientific and industrial chains, determined by external constraints, the implementation of a predominantly planned principle of state presence in the digital economy, and the international transmission of a horizontal architecture of international relations based on national digital sovereignty. The USA approach is distinguished by its integration into international cooperation, combining elements of protective, industrial, and open models. It implements a predominantly market-based approach to state presence in the digital economy, and promotes internationally a vertical architecture of international relations based on digital solidarity with partner countries and the accountability of states that violate the established rules.

Conclusions. The study confirms the assertion that the national approaches to ensuring technological sovereignty and economic security in the context of digitalization in the PRC and the USA differ significantly in terms of government regulation of the digital economy, the quality of participation in international high-tech cooperation, and their concept of the architecture of international relations. These differences are mainly determined by asymmetric development factors and the internal specifics of the digital economies of the countries studied. Numerous restrictions aimed at restraining scientific, technological, and industrial development of Russia hinder the country’s technological sovereignty and economic security, which encourages long-term partnerships with friendly states, particularly China. Despite the differences in economic scale and socio-cultural differences, Russia and China can successfully complement each other, including in scientific, industrial, and technological partnerships.

1. Babkin A.V., Balog M.M., Peryshkin M.O. Management of intellectual development of cross industry industrial symbiosis networks to improve economic security of the Russian-Belarusian border regions. Organizator proizvodstva = Organizer of Production. 2024;32(4):31-37. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.36622/1810-4894.2024.69.18.003

2. Eshtokin S.V. End-to-end technologies of the digital economy as a factor in shaping a country’s technological sovereignty. Voprosy innovatsionnoi ekonomiki = Russian Journal of Innovation Economics. 2022;12(3):1301-1314. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.12.3.116193

3. Frolov K.V., Babkin A.V., Frolov A.K. Concept and essence of digitalization and digital transformation based on fundamental and applied aspects of the systems-cybernetic theory. π-Economy. 2024;17(1):7-26. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18721/JE.17101

4. Balog M.M., Babkin A.V. The reference model of innovative potential in the system of ensuring economic security of the region. Nauchnye trudy Vol’nogo ekonomicheskogo obshchestva Rossii = Scientific Works of the Free Economic Society of Russia. 2024;250(6):393-416. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.38197/2072-2060-2024-250-6-393-416

5. Zuo Q. Digital transformation in the People’s Republic of China: Dynamics and trends. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 18. Sotsiologiya i politologiya = Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science. 2025;31(1):202-224. https://doi.org/10.24290/1029-3736-2025-31-1-202-224

6. Bukht R., Heeks R. Defining, conceptualising and measuring the digital economy. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2017. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3431732 (In Russ.: Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsii: obrazovanie, nauka, novaya ekonomika = International Organisations Research Journal. 2018;13(2):143-172.).

7. Vasiliev V.S. USA: Towards digital imperialism. SShA i Kanada: ekonomika, politika, kul’tura = USA and Canada: Economics, Politics, Culture. 2022;(5):50-67. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31857/S2686673022050042

8. Danilin I.V. Development of the digital economy in the USA and China: Factors and trends. Kontury global’nykh transformatsii: politika, ekonomika, pravo = Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law. 2019;12(6):246-267. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2019-12-6-12

9. Levchenko T.A. Digital economy of China: Level and factors of development. Vestnik Astrakhanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika = Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Economics. 2021;(3):28-36. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24143/2073-5537-2021-3-28-36

10. Fu B. In search of the Chinese model of digital economy: Lessons from a comparative analysis. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta im. S.Yu. Vitte. Seriya 1: Ekonomika i upravlenie = Moscow Witte University Bulletin. Series 1: Economics and Management. 2023;(3):74-85. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21777/2587-554X-2023-3-74-85

11. Chunlin L.I. et al. Empirical study on digital economy, industrial structure upgrading and common prosperity in Zhejiang Province. Economic geography. 2024;44(10): 136-144. https://doi.org/10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2024.10.014

12. Li Y., Zhang T. How does the digital ecosystem foster new quality productive forces? A dynamic QCA of sustainable development pathways in China. Sustainability. 2025;17(11):4935. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17114935

13. Murashova E.V., Yang C. Evaluation of digital transformation conditions for small and medium business companies in China. Moskovskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal = Moscow Economic Journal. 2022;7(7):503-515. (In Russ.).

14. Stoianova O.V., Zhang X. Digital transformation of Chinese companies: Analysis of best practices. Informatsionnoe obshchestvo = Information Society. 2023;(3):129-142. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52605/16059921_2023_03_129

15. Rybinets A.G. The main models and trends in the development of digital economies in the world on the example of the United States of America. Ekonomika i predprinimatel’stvo = Journal of Economy and Entrepreneurship. 2023;(5):167-170. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.34925/EIP.2023.154.5.027

16. Travkina N.M., Vasiliev V.S. Basic science in the USA: A cultural perspective. Perspektivy. Elektronnyi zhurnal. 2021;(2-3):83-98. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.32726/2411-3417-2021-2-3-83-98

17. Rutko D. Funding sources for research and development in the United States. Vestnik Belorusskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta = Belarusian State Economic University Bulletin. 2020;(5):5-13. (In Russ.).

18. Ramich M.S., Piskunov D.A. The securitization of cyberspace: From rulemaking to establishing legal regimes. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya = Vestnik RUDN. International Relations. 2022;22(2):238-255. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2022-22-2-238-255

19. Danilin I.V., Selyanin Ya.V. Race for nanometers: American policy toward Taiwan and Republic of Korea. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya = World Economy and International Relations. 2023;67(11):80-88. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-11-80-88

20. Kharichkov V.V. Evolution of U.S.-Taiwan relations: History and contemporary context. Aziatsko-Tikhookeanskii region: ekonomika, politika, pravo = Pacific Rim: Economics, Politics, Law. 2024;26(2):107-127. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24866/1813-3274/2024-2/107-127

21. Minat V.N. Low-budget households in the conditions of digitalization in US regions. Federalizm = Federalism. 2024;29(2):172-195. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21686/2073-1051-2024-2-172-195

22. Danilin I.V., Sidorova E.A. The concept of technological sovereignty in the transforming world. Zhurnal Novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii = Journal of the New Economic Association. 2024;(3):238-243. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31737/22212264_2024_3_238-243

23. Danilin I.V. “National champions” and technological “little giants”: Chinese industrial policy between modernization and tradition. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta = MGIMO Review of International Relations. 2024;17(6):139-154. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2024-6-99-139-154

24. Meng L. Comparative analysis of digital economy development models in China and Russia. Voprosy innovatsionnoi ekonomiki = Russian Journal of Innovation Economics. 2024;14(3):923-942. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.14.3.121364

25. Rong K., et al. Data ecosystems: Value creation processes, configurations, and evolution patterns. 2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5169672

26. Li H., Zhang C., Kettinger W.J. Digital platform ecosystem dynamics: The roles of product scope, innovation, and collaborative network centrality. MIS Quarterly. 2022;46(2):739-770. https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2022/15444

27. Kapustin A.A., Pichkov O.B. Building national digital competitiveness (the US and China cases). Ekonomicheskie otnosheniya = Journal of International Economic Affairs. 2024;14(2):363-386. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/eo.14.2.120957

28. Kapustin A.A. Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence strategy patterns in the US and PRC. Ekonomicheskie otnosheniya = Journal of International Economic Affairs. 2023;13(2):311-332. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/eo.13.2.118242

29. Zinov'eva E., Shit'kov S. Digital sovereignty in the practice of international relations. Mezhdunarodnaya zhizn' = The International Affairs. 2023;(3):38-51. URL: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2798 (accessed on 18.06.2024). (In Russ.).

30. Dudin M.N., Shkodinskiy S.V., Prodchenko I.A. Economic and infrastructural instruments for ensuring state economic sovereignty in the digital economy: The experience of Russia and the world. Voprosy innovatsionnoi ekonomiki = Russian Journal of Innovation Economics. 2022;12(1):57-80. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.12.1.114254

31. Tsvetkova N.A., Sytnik A.N. Digital confrontation between USA and China: Economic and political dimensions. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya = World Economy and International Relations. 2023;67(11):15-23. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-11-15-23