Trump-Era Science Cuts and Visa Tightening Are Accelerating an Academic Exodus to China — Shenzhen Emerges as a Research Magnet

How U.S. policy shifts are reshaping the global talent race

SHENZHEN, China — When Stephen Ferguson, a 35-year-old researcher from New York, walked into a Shenzhen conference room this June, he found about 50 scientists from China’s top institutions keen to hear about his experience working in the city. Ferguson, recruited in 2023 despite having visited China only once before, said the reception felt emblematic of a broader trend: China is actively promoting science, expanding capacity and making it easier for foreign and returning researchers to say “yes.”

Over the past decade many scholars — including a substantial number with family ties to China — have relocated across the Pacific, attracted by Beijing’s drive to become a scientific superpower. That movement has been further accelerated by U.S. policy changes since the Trump administration: cuts to federal science funding, higher costs and restrictions for skilled visas, canceled or paused grants at elite universities, and heightened scrutiny of researchers with links to China.

Data and implications

Princeton researchers who analyzed public records and academic databases found roughly 50 tenure-track scholars of Chinese descent left U.S. universities for positions in China in the first half of this year; more than 850 have departed since 2011. More than 70% of those who left worked in STEM fields, with particularly strong movement in engineering and the life sciences. High-profile moves this year include a senior biologist from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, a leading Harvard statistician, and a clean-energy researcher formerly at the U.S. Department of Energy.

The migration matters for global competition. Experts warn that sustained talent flows, coupled with rising Chinese research investment, could erode U.S. advantages and increase the likelihood that major breakthroughs — from vaccines to advanced AI — originate in China. “The U.S. is increasingly skeptical of science — whether it’s climate, health, or other areas,” said Jimmy Goodrich of the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation. “While in China, science is being embraced as a key solution to move the country forward.”

Beijing’s recruitment strategy

China is aggressively courting talent. The National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) is directing a growing share of its roughly $8 billion annual budget to talent programs, while provinces, cities and universities compete with generous packages and perks. Last month Beijing introduced a new K visa to attract young foreign STEM workers; the move has provoked domestic debate over jobs for recent graduates.

Two decades ago the U.S. outspent China on research and development by nearly fourfold. By 2023 that gap has nearly closed: U.S. R&D spending across government and private sectors reached about $956 billion, compared with China’s $917 billion (AAAS data). The central question is whether that funding and inbound talent will translate into measurable scientific gains in China’s more politically constrained academic environment.

Push and pull

Beijing’s programs — including long-standing efforts like the Thousand Talents initiative — target researchers born in China as well as international scholars. Patriotism and the chance to play a bigger role in domestic research motivate some returnees. Jun Liu, a Chinese-born statistician recently named chair professor at Tsinghua University, said he believed he could “play a bigger role here” and help raise China’s research standards.

At the same time, many scientists say they feel pushed out of the U.S. The 2018 China Initiative, which investigated researchers for possible ties to Beijing, prompted departures and heightened anxiety among Chinese American academics even after it was ended in 2022. High-profile cases reverberated widely: Charles Lieber, a Harvard nanoscientist targeted under the initiative and convicted in 2021 of falsifying tax returns and failing to report foreign finances, joined Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School (SIGS) as a full-time faculty member this year.

Even scholars who previously felt insulated have taken notice. Terence Tao, the celebrated UCLA mathematician, briefly saw $26 million in NSF grants suspended; although reinstated and not directly tied to the China policy debates, the episode prompted Chinese universities to make contact and led Tao to say he was reassessing his assumptions about the U.S. research environment.

Shenzhen: a rising nexus

Shenzhen — once a fishing village and now a global tech metropolis — is central to China’s research ambitions. The city offers state-of-the-art facilities, expanding campuses and proximity to major companies like Huawei. Institutions such as Tsinghua’s Shenzhen International Graduate School (SIGS) aim to bridge academia and industry: SIGS plans to significantly expand its faculty and already reports that roughly 80% of its staff have overseas experience.

Early-career researchers are moving as well as established stars. Alex Liu, a 38-year-old mosquito biologist trained in the U.S., joined Shenzhen Bay Laboratory in 2023 and now leads a team whose salaries are partly subsidized by local government grants. Ferguson, the New Yorker, works as a postdoc on Liu’s team and receives multiple funding streams that together exceed what he had been offered in the U.S.

Cultural and political trade-offs

Relocating to China often brings tangible benefits — better funding packages, childcare and entrepreneurial support — but it also imposes lifestyle and professional trade-offs. Foreign researchers without strong local ties can encounter suspicion and limited career advancement. Political controls and bureaucratic oversight also constrain academic freedom: “In China, scholars’ freedom at work is also constrained, as they are subject to bureaucratic control,” said Princeton sociologist Yu Xie, who led the talent-flow study.

As the U.S. and China compete for scientific talent, individual researchers face difficult choices between resources and freedoms, career opportunities and political constraints. The long-term impact of these shifts — on global innovation, national security and scientific collaboration — will depend on how each country balances investment, openness and oversight.

Bottom line: Policy choices in the U.S. and pro‑active recruitment in China are driving a notable flow of scientific talent across the Pacific. The outcome will shape where major discoveries are made in the years ahead.