Domestic science vs. international science? The myth of the entanglement between science and politics in China on transboundary air pollution in East Asia

Introduction Since the 1990s, East Asia has prioritized the production of scientific knowledge based on monitoring and modeling data, devoting significant effort to understanding the source-receptor relationships of transboundary air pollution among countries in the region. However, the lack of a common understanding of the causal mechanisms underlying air pollution in the region has persisted for decades. Despite persistent disagreements regarding the causal understanding of transboundary air pollution, there has been little research assessing whether air pollution studies in the region are subject to political influence. This paper analyzes the slow pace of shared scientific knowledge production among China, Japan, and South Korea through the lens of science diplomacy. To understand the potential influence of politics on science driven by China's national interests in East Asian international relations, the study examines whether a distinction exists between China's domestic science and international science with regard to the source-receptor relationships of transboundary air pollution. Materials and methods To investigate how institutional affiliation and funding sources influence scientific framing and attribution, this study examines research on the source-receptor relationships of transboundary air pollution using bibliometric databases. It assesses whether authors are exclusively affiliated with Chinese institutions, whether they collaborate with scholars from other countries, their countries of employment at the time of publication, and the source of funding for the research. This study hypothesizes that the greater the involvement of domestic (Chinese only) scientific production, the less likely research is to attribute air pollution in East Asia to transboundary sources originating in China and affecting neighboring countries. The second hypothesis proposes that the more heavily research is funded by Chinese institutions, the less likely the study is to discuss the transboundary nature of air pollution in the region. To test these hypotheses, the study employs qualitative content analysis of 17 publications selected through a bibliometric database. Results Hypothesis testing shows that there are no clear disparities between studies authored exclusively by Chinese scholars and those involving international collaborations in their treatment of source-receptor relationships. Similarly, funding sources do not appear to systematically influence how these studies address source-receptor relationships. Overall, the findings suggest no clear pattern linking either authorship or funding to a specific emphasis on domestic vs. transboundary air pollution. Discussion Although Chinese authors were affiliated with a wide range of public and governmental institutions, they did not appear to ignore transboundary nature of air pollution originating in China and affecting neighboring countries. Furthermore, the study does not find evidence that research projects conducted by authors affiliated with and funded by governmental agencies were directly aligned with the Chinese government's approach to transboundary air pollution issues. These findings suggest that, in order to create a shared understanding of source-receptor relationships for air pollution in the region, East Asia needs to move beyond concerns surrounding science diplomacy, particularly the entanglement of science with politics in China. By doing so, the region could promote more internationally collaborative research projects among scholars affiliated with different countries and thereby foster a shared understanding of regional air pollution dynamics.