Balancing opportunity and risk: rethinking China Scholarship Council programmes amid geopolitical tensions

International research mobility is widely seen as a strategic tool to strengthen national research capacity and global competitiveness. Programmes like the Fulbright Program (US), the Sandwich Doctorate Programme (Brazil), Erasmus Programmes (EU), and China Scholarship Council (China) illustrate this global commitment. In today's climate of heightened geopolitical tensions, however, attention has increasingly turned to the security and strategic implications of some funding schemes. Against this backdrop, the China Scholarship Council (CSC) programmes stand out as a particularly important case for closer examination.

The CSC programmes have long supported the overseas study of thousands of Chinese scholars and promoted academic exchange. At the same time, growing concerns about the unintended transfer of critical technologies and sensitive knowledge have led some institutions to review or pause collaboration with the CSC, including institutions in the United States, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, among others. Critics have raised concerns about certain requirements for scholarship holders, noting possible implications for academic freedom and freedom of expression. Host institutions in some countries have also discussed potential challenges related to data protection, intellectual property management, and research security. In addition, there are views that the financial support provided may be insufficient to cover living costs in certain countries.

To shed light on this debate, we conducted a large-scale study of CSC-funded research published between 2009 and 2021. We analysed more than 100,000 publications across major host countries, examining five key aspects: how much research is produced, how influential it is, who scholars collaborate with, what kinds of funding environments they operate in, and whether their work overlaps with security-sensitive fields. This analysis allows us to ask: what can the evidence reveal about the benefits and potential risks of large-scale mobility programmes, and what might be overlooked when international mobility is considered primarily through a geopolitical lens?

The China Scholarship Council: programs, goals, and global reach

The China Scholarship Council (CSC), founded in 1996, supports a wide range of programmes for Chinese researchers. Its goal is to select talented students and researchers to study abroad, fostering academic collaboration and international experience. To date, the CSC has established partnerships with countries including the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and several EU countries. On paper, the arrangement appears straightforward: host institutions gain access to motivated researchers without bearing salary costs, while China builds its human capital through international training.

The CSC's portfolio includes full-time and joint PhD programmes, postdoctoral fellowships, senior researcher placements, and special initiatives targeting young faculty, artistic talent, rural revitalization, and regional development. Most programmes operate through international partnerships, such as CSC–Cambridge and CSC–DAAD, and support recipients at different career stages, from undergraduates to senior researchers. Funding typically covers travel and living costs, though tuition fees are generally not included, and most participants are expected to return to China for at least two years after their overseas stay.

Evidence from CSC-funded research: impact, collaboration, and contributions

• High-impact research and strong international collaborations

  Our analysis shows that CSC-funded publications align closely with China's strategic development goals and demonstrate strong academic performance. CSC-supported researchers not only produce more highly cited papers than their Chinese peers across all disciplines, but in fields such as Physical Sciences and Engineering, they also outperform host-country peers.

  These researchers are well integrated into global scientific networks. Their publications feature more co-authors and a higher proportion of international collaborations than global, Chinese, or host-country averages. This highlights the CSC programme's role in embedding Chinese scholars into international research communities and fostering cross-border scientific collaboration.

  

• Filling gaps in host country research funding

  Publications acknowledging CSC-funding often acknowledge more funding sources than their peers in host countries, reflecting active participation in collaborative and well-supported research areas. At the same time, CSC support may play a role in areas that are relatively underfunded. In fields like Social Sciences and Humanities, and certain areas of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, the CSC may represent the sole funder acknowledged in a substantial share of publications. This pattern is evident in the Netherlands, where over 50% of CSC-funded papers in these areas list only CSC support. These findings highlight a potential contribution to under-resourced fields, but the extent and impact of this support remain uncertain, as our study did not explore this aspect in depth.

• Assessing knowledge security concerns

  When it comes to concerns about knowledge transfer and security, the data paint a nuanced picture. Only a small and declining proportion (~5%) of CSC-funded researchers abroad are affiliated with China's "Seven Sons of National Defence" universities during their time overseas. Publications produced during their overseas period rarely mention these institutions, indicating limited direct ties between CSC awardees and military-linked universities. Research related to dual-use technologies is also minimal, representing roughly 0.5% of CSC-funded publications.

These patterns indicate that some international fears may be overstated. That said, caution is warranted: author affiliations are self-reported and may not fully capture institutional ties, and any sensitive research may not be publicly visible through academic publications.

Policy recommendations: navigating openness and security in international research mobility

As international research mobility intersects with geopolitical concerns, host countries need a balanced, evidence-based approach. Blanket restrictions might risk undermining the openness that drives scientific progress.

Our findings suggest that CSC-funded researchers contribute meaningfully to global collaboration and often seem to fill funding and talent gaps in seemingly under-resourced areas within host countries, while their engagement in security-sensitive research appears limited. At the same time, even limited engagement in this area could have significant implications, which are outside the scope of our study.

Rather than severing ties entirely, targeted measures (such as improving due diligence, greater transparency in partnerships, and clear joint ethical guidelines) can help preserve the mutual benefits of academic exchange while addressing legitimate security concerns. Maintaining a healthy global research ecosystem will depend not only on safeguards but also on building trust, fostering mutual understanding, and keeping open lines of dialogue.

Read the full paper: Xie & Yegros-Yegros. (2025). A quantitative assessment of potential benefits and challenges of international researcher mobility for home and host countries: Evidence from the Chinese Scholarship Council programmes

Header image by Dries Buytink