Is China’s high-speed rail development based on stolen technology?

Abstract

Publicly recognised as one of the four great modern Chinese inventions, high-speed rail (HSR) has completely changed the mobility of most Chinese people. However, there have been numerous allegations of intellectual property (IP) infringement against China’s HSR system. While China insists on the indigenous development of their HSR technology which is distinctively beyond 300 km/h, it is interesting to analyse the arguments of both sides and reveal the truth. The discussion framework was primarily established by applying the innovation theory. By broadening the HSR scope with the 6Ms Model and combining the four types of innovation, i.e. product, process, market and organisation, it was arguable that HSR technologies included more than ‘high-speed’ technology and could be categorised into core and non-core technologies, which are defined by assessing the HSR systems’ significance in train speed advancement, safety and service criticality to HSR operation. Looking into core and non-core technologies, as well as the focused product and process innovations of the innovation theory, a 2x2 study framework was formed which enabled the innovation level of China’s HSR technologies to be analysed at four dimensions. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were employed to examine how China had developed its HSR technology in terms of innovation or IP infringement aspects. Qualitative research on archival documents and personal interviews with HSR experts were conducted. The analysis showed China had obtained considerable innovations primarily in core-technology, in which rolling stock, infrastructure and system integration related advancements were evident. While China’s train carbody exterior design was found to be similar to Japanese design, it could not be confirmed as an IP infringement due to unavailable supporting evidence. The quantitative research was on China's HSR sub-system patent application data, with respect to other countries and the three-stage HSR development in China. For most of the HSR sub-systems, results showed China topped globally in patent application numbers. The 20-year patent application trend also demonstrated Chinese grew massively in HSR patent application after its first indigenously developed HSR train CRH380A. The results of both qualitative and quantitative analyses formed the basis for measuring China’s HSR indigenous development and IP infringement. The HSR technologies were then rated as either “substantial”, “moderate”, or “negligible” in a self-devised rating scale. It was observed China had realised a range of substantial to moderate innovation in various HSR systems. China had attained outstanding achievements in core technology innovation, particularly in rolling stock and infrastructure for product innovation, and system integration for process innovation. Non-core technology advancements in product and process innovations were also noticeable, mainly in infrastructure systems. Despite the aforementioned possible IP infringement of carbody design, it could be concluded that China had achieved a considerable level of innovation in its HSR development. Therefore, the claim that China’s HSR development is based on stolen technology is not well-established.