One role of the U.S. as global driver of innovation is declining due to a global pivot in technology entrepreneurship.

American education and entrepreneurism in technology have been either an essential or at least a primary factor in technology innovation in emerging countries. Now, home grown enterprises in these countries no longer depend as much on the United States. This will affect how much deference will be given in myriad ways to the U.S.

The established model of innovation in information technology is the circulation model. That is, individuals (primarily Asians) study and work in the U.S., often found companies in the U.S. But many return to their country bearing skills and contacts, and found businesses many with bridges into the U.S technology ecosystem.

A 2006 book, The New Argonauts: Regional Advantage in the Global Economy by AnnaLee Saxenian says that immigrants in Silicon Valley, mainly Chinese and Indian, built transnational networks linking California with Bangalore, Taipei, and Shanghai, launching startups, mobilizing venture capital, and transferring managerial and technical know-how.

This played an expanding role over 50 -plus years. I described here the transnational workforce of Indians who work, live and invest in both Silicon Valley and in India. This workforce was the demographic foundation of the Indian community in U.S. through today. Key milestones: 1965 immigration reform enabled growth; H-1B visas surged from the 1990s, with Indians claiming 50-70% by the 2000s-2010s. Indian outsourcing firms (TCS, Infosys, Wipro) dominated IT staffing while US companies established major operations in India. Indian-American population grew from 500,000 (1990) to 3 million (2020), forming substantial suburban communities. Recent trends include tightened visa restrictions under Trump, diversification of Indian firms beyond H-1B dependence, and expanded US corporate presence in India employing hundreds of thousands.

One study looked at the “returnee” phenomenon in China. “China’s experience validated this expectation. A body of empirical literature from the late 2000s and early 2010s shows that Chinese returnee-led firms outperform locally founded firms across multiple dimensions, including innovation output, export intensity, speed of internationalisation, and overall firm performance. Many studies  consistently found that overseas experience translated into measurable advantages for entrepreneurial ventures, particularly in knowledge-intensive sectors. These outcomes were reinforced by policy: China complemented market forces with explicit state interventions—returnee-focused incubators, preferential funding, and talent programs—designed to absorb and amplify diaspora expertise.” The paper: “The Indian Returnee Paradox: Why the Diaspora Is No Longer Driving Startup Success.”