THE ACADEMY AND UNIVERSITY COMPONENTS OF CHINA’S GLOBAL LEADERSHIP IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
O.O. GRACHEV 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3980-2890
V.I. KHOREVIN 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6509-4736
1 Dobrov Institute for Scientific and Technological Potential and Science History Studies of the NAS of Ukraine, Ukraine
Nauka naukozn. 2024, 4(126): 51—77
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2024.04.051
Section: Foreign science. International science and technology cooperation
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: Using documentary and factual analysis, the authors substantiated the existence of a connection between China’s leadership position in the global science and technology and state policy measures aimed at the innovation-driven development. The authors made an innovative analytical review of crucial changes in R&D and education resulting from the implementation of the state policy aimed to overcome the century-long backwardness and economic chaos and turn China into a global science and technology leader. The source base of the study is foreign and Ukrainian scientific publications, data from official statistics offices and international scientific organizations. The evolution of the Academy of university components of science and technology in China in 1949—2021 was analyzed in four phases. The first phase (1949—1959) was characterized by changes necessitated by the planned economy and ideological dictates. The second phase (1960—1977) featured stagnation in the Academy and university sectors. The third stage (1978—2001) saw laying down the fundament for the country’s transition to the innovation-driven development and the international standards in education. The fourth phase (from 2002 on) was characterized by the development of innovative technologies in parallel with improvements of living conditions as part of “Beautiful China” project. The study elaborated on the essence of reforms in higher education (1980s — 1990s) aimed at the adoption of the Western model in the domestic university sector; the implementation of “Project of Innovative Knowledge” in the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) as a pilot project for creating the scientific foundations for building up the innovation-driven economy, and programs for fostering human resources, with talent support in particular, returning expatriate researchers and involving distinguished foreign professionals. The contents of the CAS programs “Innovations” (2011) and “Pioneering Initiative” (2014), aiming to turn China into a global leader are highlighted. Strong emphasis is made on the program “One Belt, One Road” run since 2013, the role of the CAS therein, and the government initiatives of 2015 aimed to transform China into a global leader in science & technology and education till 2050. The study demonstrated that reforms in the Chinese science & technology and education were being implemented amid positive changes in the economy and given the broad-scale involvement of the national power bodies, which can serve as an example for Ukraine.
Keywords: science and technology, education, research and development, universities, the People’s Republic of China, the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
References
1. Schneegans, S., Lewis, J., & Straza, T. (2021). The Race Against Time for Smarter Development — Executive Summary. UNESCO Science Report: The Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 30—78. https://doi.org/10.18356/9789210058575c010
2. Yatskiv, Ya.S., Malitskyi, B.A., & Bublyk, S.H. (2016). Transformation of the scientific system of Ukraine during the 90s of the 20th century: the period of transition to the market. Science and Innovation, 12 (6), 6—14. https://doi.org/10.15407/scin12.06.006 [in Ukrainian].
3. Mekh, O.A., & Bublyk, S.H (2021). Research and education entities in Ukraine: a structural analysis of international ratings and reporting documents. Science and Science of Science, 2 (112), 77—99. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2021.02.077 [in Ukrainian].
4. Grachev, O.O., & Khorevin, V.I. (2020). The science academies across the world. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
5. Cao, С. (2015). China. UNESCO Science Report: towards 2030. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 621—641.
6. Cao, С. (2021). China. UNESCO Science Report: The Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 623—639.
7. Cao, C., Li, N., Li, X., & Liu, L. (2013). Science and Government. Reforming China’s S&T system. Science, 341 (6145), 460—462. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1234206
8. Cao, С., Baas, J., Wagner, C., & Jonkers, K. (2020). Returning scientists and the emergence of China’s science. Science and Public Policy, 47 (2), 172—183. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scz056
9. Suttmeier, R. P., Cao, C., & Simon, D. F. (2006). “Knowledge Innovation” and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Science, 312 (5770), 58—59. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122280
10. Kang, Q. (2004). Higher Educational Reform in China Today. Policy Futures in Evaluation, 2 (1), 141—149. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfi e.2004.2.1.4
11. Shen, W., Zhang, H., & Liu, C. (2022). Toward a Chinese model: De-Sovietization reforms of China’s higher education in the 1980s and 1990s. International Journal of Chinese Education, 11 (3), 1—17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2212585X221124936
12. Swinbanks, D., Nathan, R., & Triendl, R. (1997). Western research assessment meets Asian cultures. Nature, 389 (6647), 113—117. https://doi.org/10.1038/38088
13. Shu, F., Quan, W., Chen, B., Qiu, J., Sugimoto, C.R., & Larivière, V. (2020). The role of web of science publications in China’s tenure system. Scientometrics, 122 (3), 1683—1695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03339-x
14. Quan, W., Chen, B., & Shu, F. (2017). Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999–2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (2), 486—502. https://doi.org/10.1108/ajim-01-2017-0014/
15. Peng, C. (2011). Focus on quality, not just quantity. Nature, 475 (7356), 267. https://doi.org/10.1038/475267a
16. Zweig, D., & Wang, H. (2013). Can China bring back the best? The Communist Party organizes China’s search for talent. The China Quarterly, 215 (3), 590—615. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2195881
17. Liu, X. (2018). The “Double First Class” Initiative under Top-Level Design. ECNU Review of Education, 1 (1), 147—152. https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe2018010109
18. Balanchuk, I.S. (2019). Building an innovation system in the People’s Republic of China. Science, Technologies, Innovations, 1, 23—35 [in Ukrainian].
19. Salikhova, O.B., & Honcharenko, D.O. (2020). Policy of endogenous development of pharmaceuticals in China: lessons for Ukraine. Economics and forecasting, 2, 139—157. https://doi.org/10.15407/eip2020.02.139 [in Ukrainian].
20. Bezrukova, N.V., & Lekunovich, A.Yu. (2017). Peculiarities of building an innovative economy: analysis of the experience of China and the reality of Ukraine. Efficient Economy, 4. URL: http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=5544 (last accessed: 01.09.2024) [in Ukrainian].
21. Kavunenko, L.P., & Isakova, N.B. (2021). Traditions and prospects of scientific and technological cooperation between Ukraine and China. Science and Science of Science, 4 (114), 94—111. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2021.04.094 [in Ukrainian].
22. Shu, F., Liu, S., & Larivière, V. (2022). China’s Research Evaluation Reform: What are the Consequences for Global Science? Minerva, 60 (4), 329—347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-022-09468-7
23. Agarwala, N., & Chaudhary, R.D. (2019). China’s Policy on Science and Technology: Implications for the Next Industrial Transition. India Quarterly, 75 (2), 206—227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928419841786
24. The Chinese Academy of Sciences at 70. Editorials. (2019). Nature, 574 (7776), 5. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-02950-5
25. Dali, Ma. (2019). Boundary repair: Science and enterprise at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Social Studies of Science, 49 (3), 381—402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719846560
26. Zhang, Q. (2019). The Chinese Academy of Sciences responds: we are with the government and with the people. Correspondence. Nature, 574 (7779), 486. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03205-z
27. Baark, E., & Suying, L. (1990). Science and technology policy reforms in China — a critical assessment. Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies, 5 (10), 7—26. https://doi.org/10.22439/cjas.v5i1.1770
28. Cao, C. (1998). The Chinese Academy of Sciences: The Election of Scientists into the Elite Group. Minerva, 36 (4), 323—346. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004421406141
29. Irvin, A., & Sun, T.Q. (2021). Transformative Innovation Policy: A Case-Study from China. Innovation and Development Policy, 3 (1), 21—23. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.2096-5141.2021.0002
30. Shu, F., Sugimoto, C.R., & Larivière, V. (2020). The institutionalized stratification of the Chinese higher education system. Quantitative Science Studies, 2 (1), 327— 334. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00104
31. Khan, C.T. (2018). The Inferences & Nature of China’s Transfer and Development of Technology from Higher Education Institutions to Industry. Open Journal of Social Science, 6, 12—34. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2018.69002
32. Yi, W. & Long, C.X. (2021). Does the Chinese version of Bayh-Dole Act promote university innovation? China Economic Quarterly International, 1 (3), 244—257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceqi.2021.09.003
33. Cai, Y.Q. (2018). The Evolution of Distribution of Technology Transfer in China: Evidence from Patent Licensing. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 8, 1239—1252. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2018.85084
34. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Research Policy, 29 (2), 109—123. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
35. Zhang, H., & Sonobe, T. (2011). Development of science and technology parks in China, 1988—2008. Economics, 5, 1—25. https://doi.org/10.5018/economicsejournal.ja.2011-6
36. Yu, X. (2023). An assessment of the green development efficiency of industrial parks in China: Based on non-desired output and non-radial DEA model. Structural Chang e and Economic Dynamics, 66, 81—88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2023.04.010
37. Vogel, K.M., & Ben Ouagrham-Gormley, S. (2023). Scientists as spies? Assessing U.S. claims about the security threat posed by China’s Thousand Talents Program for the US life sciences. Politics Life Sci., 42 (1), 32—64. https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2022.13
38. Qiu, J. (2011). China sets 2020 vision for science. Nature, 470 (7332), 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/470015a
39. Cyranoski, D. (2014). Chinese science gets mass transformation. Nature, 513 (7519), 468—469. https://doi.org/10.1038/513468a
40. Xu, F. & Li, X. (2016). The changing role of metrics in research institute evaluations undertaken by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Palgrave Communication, 2 (1), 1—6. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.78
41. Bai, C. (2016). The Pioneer Initiative: A New Era in Chinese Research, Small, 12 (16), 2115—2117. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201503720
42. Van Noorden, R. (2022). The number of researchers with dual US-China affiliations is falling. Nature, 606 (7913), 235—236. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01492-7
43. Tollefson, J. (2019). Chinese American scientists uneasy amid crackdown on foreign influence. Nature, 570 (7759), 13—14. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-01901605-9
44. Yang, X., Zhou, X. & Cao, C. (2023). Remaking the Chinese Academy of Sciences: Under pressure to reinvent itself, the CAS should concentrate on managing largescale research infrastructures. Science, 379 (6629), 240—243. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.add3428
