scholarly journals China's funding system and research innovation

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Qiu
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Associate Editor ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Total Output ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Peking University ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Tongji University

Abstract In the past decade, China's total expenditure on research and development (R&D) has been increasing by about 20% per year. And the total output of scientific research from China has not failed to impress: a 2011 study by Britain's Royal Society found that, in 2004–08, the country produced 10% of the world's published scientific articles, putting it second after the United States. But a study conducted by the World Bank and China's State Council concluded in the year 2012 that Chinese research quality falls short. It noted that the country produces relatively few high-impact articles, and that the majority of Chinese patents constitute minor novelties rather than genuine innovations. So what has gone wrong? And what needs to be changed to spur innovation in China significantly? In a forum organized by National Science Review, its executive associate editor Mu-ming Poo asked four leading scientists in China. Yadong Li Chemist of Tsinghua University in Beijing (Courtesy of Yadong Li) Yi Rao Biologist of Peking University in Beijing (Courtesy of Yi Rao) Dingsheng Wang Physicist of Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing (Courtesy of Dingsheng Wang) Pinxian Wang Geologist of Tongji University in Shanghai (Courtesy of Pinxian Wang) Mu-ming Poo (Chair) Neuroscientist of Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Shanghai (Courtesy of Mu-ming Poo)

scholarly journals Paleontology: advancing China's international leadership

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-176
Author(s):  
Hepeng Jia
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Associate Editor ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
State University ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The Status ◽  
Organismic Evolution ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Robust Evidence

Abstract In recent years, Chinese scientists have achieved significant progress in paleontological discoveries and scientific studies. Series of studies published in top journals, such as Science, Nature and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), have astonished the world by presenting beautiful fossils that furnish robust evidence to enrich the understanding of organismic evolution, major extinctions and stratigraphy. It has been portrayed as the heyday in the paleontology of China. What is the status of the field? What factors have caused the avalanche of fossil discoveries in China? What implications can these new discoveries provide for our understanding of current evolution theories? How, given their significant contribution to the world's paleontology scholarship, can Chinese scientists play a due leadership role in the field? At an online forum organized by the National Science Review (NSR), its associate editor-in-chief, Zhonghe Zhou, asked four scientists in the field as well as NSR executive editor-in-chief Mu-ming Poo to join the discussion. Jin Meng Paleobiologist at American Museum of Natural History Mu-ming Poo Neurobiologist at Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Shuzhong Shen Stratigrapher at Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Shuhai Xiao Paleobiologist and geobiologist at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Zhonghe Zhou (Chair) Paleobiologist at Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP), Chinese Academy of Sciences

scholarly journals Stem-cell research and regenerative medicine in China

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Qiu
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Regenerative Medicine ◽  
Stem Cell Research ◽  
Gene Editing ◽  
Associate Editor ◽  
Human Embryos ◽  
Director General ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The World ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

Abstract For stem-cell researchers around the world, 2015 was a roller-coaster year. In April, Junjiu Huang, a biologist at the Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, published the first paper on gene editing in human embryos with CRISPR-cas9. This sparked a global controversy—with many Western media using this as an example of China's lack of ethical standards. Subsequent discussions, which culminated in the summit in Washington, DC, last December, have eased the anxieties to some extent over this study and similar studies have now been proposed or approved in the UK and Sweden. Surprisingly, according to Nature magazine (the same magazine publishing some of the news reports on this study), Huang was one of the 10 scientists in the world that made a difference last year. In a forum chaired by National Science Review's Executive Associate Editor Mu-ming Poo, stem-cell researchers and a bioethicist discussed how they see last year's furore over gene editing, why China should streamline its oversight and regulatory processes, and where the future of the country's stem-cell research and regenerative medicine lies. Duanqing Pei Stem-cell researcher and Director General of Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Guangzhou Xiaomei Zhai Bioethicist and Executive Director of the Centre for Bioethics, Peking Union Medical College, in Beijing Qi Zhou Stem-cell researcher at the Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Beijing Jianhong Zhu Neurosurgeon and neuroscientist at Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, in Shanghai Mu-ming Poo (Chair) Neuroscientist and Director of the Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Shanghai

scholarly journals The Founding of University of the Chinese Academic of Sciences

2015 ◽  
pp. 21-23
Author(s):  
Zha Qiang ◽  
Guangli Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Research Capacity ◽  
Chinese Universities ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research Sector ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Soviet Model

Chinese universities expanded their aggregate enrolment size dramatically in the past fifteen years. Now they seem to be greeting opportunities to magnify their research capacity, which is exemplified by the founding of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. For years, and following the Soviet model, China holds a separate research sector, with Chinese Academy of Sciences being the hallmark. Now such a structure seems to be at a crossroads. Changes occurring to it, no matter dramatic or gradual, will render China's university sector the primary beneficiary, which in turn enjoys a leap in terms of research resource and capacity.

scholarly journals Lu Yu: the past and future of condensed matter physics

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-376
Author(s):  
Mu-ming Poo ◽  
Ling Wang
Keyword(s):  
Condensed Matter ◽  
Rooted Tree ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Condensed Matter Physics ◽  
Fed State ◽  
The Past ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
History Of ◽  
Theoretical Physicist ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

Abstract Lu Yu, a distinguished theoretical physicist at the Institute of Physics (IOP) of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), has witnessed the development of Chinese physics over the past five decades, from the difficult period of 1960s when physicists worked in a ‘half-fed’ state to the present flowering springtime of Chinese physics in which many breakthroughs at the frontier of physics are attracting international recognition. He considers these achievements to be not merely ‘intermittent bubbles’, but the cumulative result of sustained governmental support of basic research over the past decades. In his area of condensed-matter physics, Yu sees ‘a big deep-rooted tree with many branches—some old branches have withered away, but new shoots continue to appear’. In a recent interview with NSR, Yu reflected upon the recent history of condensed-matter physics in China—what has been accomplished and what lies ahead—and his view on the development of physics in general.

The Chinese school of archaeology

Antiquity ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 87 (337) ◽  
pp. 896-904 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhang Liangren
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Umbilical Cord ◽  
Chinese Culture ◽  
Archaeological Investigation ◽  
The Past ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Chinese School ◽  
Entire Nation ◽  
Cultural Origins ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

In 1959, at a meeting reviewing the 'archaeological achievements of the past 10 years' in celebration of the tenth anniversary of the 'New China (1949-)', the leading archaeologist Yin Da (1906-1983), then director of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), urged all the archaeologists in China "to cooperate fully, so that in the next three or five years, in the entire nation, we can build up a scientific and holistic system out of all cultural remains of all periods; that is to say, to build up a Marxist Chinese archaeological system" (Yin 1959: 123).This call had two keywords in it.One was 'Chinese'. Ever since the early twentieth century, growing nationalism had drum-beaten Chinese archaeologists to search for Chinese cultural origins (Liu & Chen 2001: 317). A particularly urgent matter for archaeologists of the 1950s was to dispel the notion of 'the western origin of Chinese culture' that was current among foreign and native archaeologists during theNationalist Era (1911-1949). To achieve this goal, it was imperative to undertake archaeological investigation systematically so as to prove the autochthonous origins and undisrupted development of Chinese civilisations. The second word, 'Marxist', reflects a process of cutting the umbilical cord of the reborn archaeology of the 'New China' from the 'bourgeois archaeology' of the 'Old China' and swaddling the discipline with the mantle of Marxist theories and models

Social Origins of the Chinese Scientific Elite

1999 ◽  
Vol 160 ◽  
pp. 992-1018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cong Cao
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Social Stratification ◽  
Family Background ◽  
The United States ◽  
Occupational Prestige ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Scientific Elite ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Mathematics And Physics

The literature on China's social stratification and mobility has discussed the roles of family background and an individual's education attainment. This article aims to extend the existing literature by examining the interplay of these two aspects in fostering a homogeneous group of scientists, the members (yuanshi) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS, Zhongguo kexueyuan). Since its establishment in 1955, honorific CAS membership has been awarded to outstanding Chinese scientists in their respective fields. As of the end of 1997, a total of 859 Chinese natural scientists, including 40 women, had been elected to the five Academic Divisions of the CAS – Mathematics and Physics, Chemistry, Biological Sciences, Earth Sciences, and Technological Sciences (Table 1) – of whom 610 were alive. They have been renowned, nationally if not internationally, for their academic achievements and contributions, and they have a reputation and prestige similar to those enjoyed by their counterparts in other countries, such as members of the National Academy of Sciences in the United States and fellows of the Royal Society in Britain. Because the occupational prestige of scientists is very high in China, as it is in other countries, and following similar research on the scientific elite, it is reasonable to define CAS members as the Chinese scientific elite.

scholarly journals A Bridge to the World

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Zhi-Hong Xu
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Revolution ◽  
Cell Biology ◽  
Vice President ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Plant Physiologist ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Peking University ◽  
National University ◽  
Fast Development ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

Zhi-Hong Xu is a plant physiologist who studied botany at Peking University (1959–1965). He joined the Shanghai Institute of Plant Physiology (SIPP), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), as a graduate student in 1965. He recalls what has happened for the institute, during the Cultural Revolution, and he witnessed the spring of science eventually coming to China. Xu was a visiting scholar at the John Innes Institute and in the Department of Botany at Nottingham University in the United Kingdom (1979–1981). He became deputy director of SIPP in 1983 and director in 1991; he also chaired the State Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Genetics SIPP (1988–1996). He worked as a visiting scientist in the Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, National University of Singapore, for three months each year (1989–1992). He served as vice president of CAS (1992–2002) and as president of Peking University (1999–2008). Over these periods he was heavily involved in the design and implementation of major scientific projects in life sciences and agriculture in China. He is an academician of CAS and member of the Academy of Sciences for the Developing World. His scientific contributions mainly cover plant tissue culture, hormone mechanism in development, as well as plant developmental response to environment. Xu, as a scientist and leader who has made an impact in the community, called up a lot of excellent young scientists returning to China. His efforts have promoted the fast development of China's plant and agricultural sciences.

scholarly journals When the East meets the West: the future of traditional Chinese medicine in the 21st century

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Qiu
Keyword(s):  
Chinese Medicine ◽  
Traditional Chinese Medicine ◽  
Associate Editor ◽  
Western Science ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Diverse Backgrounds ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Analytical Tools

Abstract Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been practiced in China for thousands of years. In the past decade, there have been intensive debates in China about the nature of this ancient practice and its future development. Some critics argue that TCM theories are inaccurate descriptions of the human body that verge on imagination, and so have no place in modern healthcare systems. Other, however, say that TCM has a lot to offer to Western science and medicine and that emerging analytical tools hold great potentials in bridging the gap between the two worlds with contrasting philosophy and approaches. In a forum chaired by National Science Review's Executive Associate Editor Mu-ming Poo, five panelists from diverse backgrounds discussed the differences between TCM and Western science and medicine, recent progress in TCM research, and key challenges in modernizing this ancient practice. Hongxin Cao Director of Science and Technology Bureau, State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the People's Republic of China Aiping Lu Dean of the School of Chinese Medicine at Hong Kong Baptist University Yiling Wu President of Hebei Academy of Integrative Chinese and Western Medicine Boli Zhang President of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine and President of the Chinese Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine Liping Zhao Professor and former deputy director of the Shanghai Center for System Biology at Shanghai Jiao Tong University Mu-ming Poo (Chair) Neuroscientist and Director of Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Neurosciences in Shanghai

Chinese Intellectuals and Science A History of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)

1989 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuping Yao
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Research ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Chinese Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Chinese Intellectuals ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The ArgumentThe Chinese Academy of Sciences, founded in 1949 – the same year as the People's Republic of China – has attempted to use science to speed up technological, economic, and defense-related development, as well as the entire process of modernization. At' the same time, political structures on the development of science have hampered scientific output and kept it to a level that was far below what might have been expected from the creative potential of China's scientists.Early in this century, when modern science was brought to China by foreign missionaries and by scientists and students returning from abroad, only a few people in the country were engaged in scientific research. In 1928 and 1929, two state-run comprehensive research establishments were founded: the Academia Sinica, consisting mainly of scientists who had studied in the United States, and the Peking Academy, consisting mainly of European-trained scientists. Two decades later, a month after the proclamation of the People's Republic of China, a single national scientific research body was founded: the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). This article will review the contribution and status of the CAS, its successes and its failures in the ensuing forty years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document