000			03014nam a22002057a 4500
001			48107
003			OSt
005			20250610152244.0
008			250610b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aZHAO Xinlei _eauthor
245			_aTechnological hedging and differentiated responses of Southeast Asian countries to U.S.–China technological competition: _ba case study on artificial intelligence (AI) / _cXinlei Zhao
260			_c2025
520			_aThe rise of artificial intelligence (AI), represented by ChatGPT, has triggered a new wave of technological competition between nations. Major powers like China and the United States, backed by abundant resources, dominate the discourse and hold a significant advantage in the AI field. However, as the technological rivalry between these two countries intensifies, AI represents a classic ‘double-edged sword’ for many small and medium-sized countries. Therefore, the core argument of this paper is that the AI policies of small and medium-sized countries are not simply about bandwagoning or depending on major powers. At their core, these policies represent a complex form of technological hedging. External security concerns drive small and medium-sized countries to adopt hedging as a primary strategy, while internal interest preferences influence the varying intensities of this technological hedging. The findings of this paper indicate that small countries’ technological policies can be categorized into three models: strong hedging, medium hedging, and weak hedging. Different paths of technological hedging reflect the rational balance these nations make between security and economic interests in different contexts. The case of AI development in ASEAN also demonstrates the significant imbalance between member states. Singapore is classified as a technological frontrunner, while Malaysia, Indonesia, and Vietnam are categorized as followers. Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Brunei, and the Philippines are considered latecomers in the field of AI. In terms of specific AI policies, Singapore and Vietnam adopt a strong technological hedging strategy, seeking more cooperation and interaction with the U.S. or other countries due to caution and concerns about China’s technological security. Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines follow a medium hedging strategy, while Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Brunei adopt a weak hedging approach. The differences in hedging intensity are primarily due to varying internal legitimacy pathways and the strength of backup resources. ASEAN member states pursue different technological paths based on their own circumstances to promote AI development.
650			_aARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE _xASEAN
650			_aCHINA-US RIVALRY
650			_aTECHNOLOGICAL DIPLOMACY
773			_gThe Pacific Review, Volume 38, Number 3, May 2025, pages: 502-533
856			_uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09512748.2024.2408010 _zClick here for full text
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE _n0
999			_c48107 _d48107