Steve Davis, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Stanford Graduate School of Business lecturer, wrote in a commentary on the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) website that in an era marked by enduring U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry, a joint initiative by the CSIS and the Brookings Institution seeks to expand collaborative opportunities between the two nations.

"Between global climate change, food insecurity, and the very real threat of future pandemics, humanity is facing truly existential challenges," he wrote. "Against that backdrop, it is imperative to examine these opportunities and constraints, then reimagine new mechanisms and narratives—safe harbors—where China and the United States can continue to leverage their collective expertise for the global public good."

Davis is also an executive strategic advisor and interim director for the China Country Office. He has worked under the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and is the former president and CEO of PATH, a leading global health innovation organization.

The U.S.-China relationship has deteriorated significantly over the past decade, shaped by policies and national sentiments that have negatively impacted how the two countries perceive and engage with each other, he wrote in the commentary. As the dynamics of this new phase of great power competition unfold, questions arise about the fate of the substantial historical partnership between the U.S. and China on crucial social issues. Davis said "global climate change, food insecurity, and the very real threat of future pandemics" are issues on which the possibility of a US-China collaborative relationship could be crucial.

According to Davis' essay, amidst confrontational dynamics and media attention, China's historical and current contributions to global development are often overlooked. China's collaboration efforts have grown, evident in scientific projects spanning health, agriculture, and climate. However, recent years have seen a shift as President Xi Jinping actively seeks to bolster China's global influence, utilizing initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Despite differing perspectives on their impact, these initiatives mark a departure from China's historical approach to global development, he wrote.

Davis said China's international collaborations have concentrated on global social impact, often partnering with various U.S. entities, with some collaborations extending over a century. Organizations like the Rockefeller Foundation, present since 1913, have shaped medical education at Peking Union Medical College and supported humanitarian causes. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, since establishing its Beijing office in 2007, has led initiatives to enhance China's medical product quality, combat diseases, and assist global low-resource needs. This history of collaboration reflects the United States' commitment to international exchanges for diplomatic purposes, as evidenced by programs like Fulbright agreements. China's engagement in these partnerships has strengthened its expertise and involvement in critical social issues.

According to Davis' essay, the erosion of trust in health-related collaborations due to COVID-19's origins and responses, coupled with China's stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, has strained collaborations further, forcing partners into a defensive stance to sustain progress in a challenging environment. Davis argues that if decoupling continues, "neither Chinese nor U.S. authorities and non-state actors provide clearer opportunities for collaboration, the chances of tackling major global challenges will be diminished." Davis said the importance of partnership with China for the greater global good remains paramount, and efforts are needed to foster a collaborative approach.