The results of the Chinese study enjoyed something good last year. The operation of Jiangsu University is a good example. The campus is located on the banks of the Yangtze River in the city of Zhenjiang, a three-hour drive from Shanghai. The university saw its ‘adjusted sharing’ points in the Nature Index, which tracks authors ’organizations on research topics across all 82 high-level scientific journals, rising 118% between 2020 and 2021.
Share – Key Natural Indicator Metric – the number that is part of an article assigned to an institution, city or state / region, which considers the author’s role in the article linked to that institution or region. Fixed Sharing takes account of minor variations in the total number of articles in the Nature Index.
Jiangsu University is not uncommon among Chinese institutions. According to an analysis of the Nature Index Annual Tables 2022, released today, the 31 fastest growing centers, as judged by the adjusted Share of Change, were all in China. (See also ‘Leading Institutions in Nature Index 2022 Annual Tables’.) Of the top 50 fast-rising institutions, only 10 were from other countries or regions. This marks a major change compared to 2021 levels, where China can apply for applications from only two of the top ten fast-growing institutions. These were the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen and Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
Researchers speculate that the poor performance of Chinese institutions over the past year could be a mistake; they think the latest results could be a sign that the Chinese government’s long-term investment in science is beginning to bear fruit.
A similar pattern emerges when China is considered to be a country close to other leading scientific nations in the Nature Index (see ‘Leading Countries 2021’). The United States has maintained a high position at 19,857.35 of 2021, but its adjusted share dropped by 6.2% in 2021, the largest decline in the top 10 countries and its highest fall since 2015. China is in second place with its share. 16,753.86, with a growth of 14.4% on adjusted allocations by 2021, such a large increase among the top 10 countries in the 2022 Annual Tables. This has been a significant improvement over the past year, with the nation raising the figure by 1.2%.
South Korea and Switzerland, in eighth and ninth places, respectively, also made progress. By 2021, South Korea’s adjusted share has increased by 2.3%, compared to 1.9% by 2020. Although Switzerland reported a 1.7% decline in 2021, this was an improvement in 2020’s 6.6% decline.
Money speaks for itself
“It’s no big deal, money is the key here” when it comes to China’s growth, says Miguel Lim, a researcher in international education and development at the University of Manchester, UK. Lim is the founding founder of China and the Higher Education Network, an organization that brings together researchers from around the world who love Chinese higher education. “There has been a steady and growing growth in research funding [in China] and it has taken some time to look, but I think that is what we are seeing for the first time,” he adds.
Cong Cao, a science policy researcher at the University of Nottingham Ningbo in China, says China’s government’s growth in investment in research and development, which accounted for 2.4% of total domestic production by 2021, continues to contribute to China’s growth. . Research costs, as a percentage of Chinese domestic production, have grown slightly from 0.56% in 1996 to 2.14% in 2018, according to the World Bank.
The country’s scientific financing began in 1995 under the so-called Project 211. ‘21 ’in the name was a symbol of the 21st century, when the goal was to prepare universities. The second ‘1’ referred to nearly 100 universities included in the project; these institutions were given considerable support to improve their research capacity.
Three years later, the government followed Project 985, to coincide with the 100th anniversary of Peking University in Beijing. The policy has secured additional grants to nine universities from Project 211 to build new research centers, forming the C9 league – often described as China’s response to the Ivy League team of eight reputable universities in the eastern United States. Project 985 has grown to include 39 universities.
In 2017, the Chinese government announced the Double First-Class Initiative, which identified 140 potential universities as world-class institutions. It also set out various areas in which China could become a world leader.
“I will not call you a vain project. There are clear indications of a reputation in all of this, but investment has been made to achieve strategic governance in areas that China considers important, such as engineering science, ”said Lim. “It’s not just about position in the balance, it’s about competing with the United States at the highest level of strategy.”
Thinking for a long time
Financial instability has also had an impact, says Hamish Coates, director of higher education research at Tsinghua University in Beijing, because it means researchers can better plan for years to come. The Double First-Class strategy has embarked on the government’s commitment to science until 2050, for example. “That sends a message that the government understands how science is made,” Coates said.
In the end, however, China’s scientific investment will diminish once more research is achieved, Coates said, although that may not happen for many years. “We are seeing a reduction in compensation for power plants like the United Kingdom and the United States. If you add another US $ 1 million to research there, you do not see the same promotions you would in China.
The effects of the epidemic
Is it just a coincidence that China’s institutional allocation points in the Nature Index rise sharply between 2020 and 2021 than in other universities in the world? Did the COVID-19 epidemic affect the results? It is impossible to say for sure, says Lim. “In the United Kingdom, we have slowed down as we were told to support students first as we switch to online teaching and ensure the safety of students,” said Lim. “I can guess that Western researchers were busy doing other things like that, but how can I say that for sure without data?”
That data is not available, so it is impossible to know whether Chinese researchers were less focused on the effects of COVID-19 than their counterparts elsewhere. “I can really appreciate the COVID question,” Lim said.
Coates thinks it is too early to see the impact of the epidemic on the Nature Index tables – he says that will not be seen in the next few years. “You have to work back. The research included in the 2022 tables is likely to be funded back in 2017; It is not the same as all the research conducted in 2020, ”Coates said. “You can’t say it’s all COVID.”
Scholars all over the world are complaining about the culture of publishing or extinction, where the publication of the most influential journal is valued above all else, but such a culture is especially prevalent in China, says Lim. “It’s a higher bar to remove than here in the United Kingdom. Here, you can start your career without much publishing under your belt, ”he said. “But in China, universities will need a certain number of books for master’s or PhD students before they can get jobs.” Usually, Cao said, graduate students in China should publish several papers, otherwise they are not allowed to graduate.
Although many Western researchers have criticized the pressure to continue publishing papers, saying it creates a toxic culture in the workplace, too much emphasis on printing presses could further explain China’s dominance in the list of fast-growing institutions, Lim said. There are also ways in which the higher education system in China can act as a valve to relieve excess stress, however, and this can help to further research production by mitigating one of the risks associated with publishing or brain damage. . “When you reach the age of 60 in China, you are on your way to retire and move on to training young people. That is very important, ”said Coates. “In the West, you find people in their 80s arguing with new researchers for grants.”
It is impossible to predict or interpret annual trends by isolating them. This makes it difficult to understand why China’s performance in fast-growing institutions this year is so different from last year. Given the steady investment in Chinese research and development, however, it is likely that strong performance this year is an indication of what is to come.
“The tables show that Chinese investment in research through their large and well-established institutions creates the effect of ongoing research in the natural sciences,” said David Swinbanks, founder of the Nature Index. He adds: “While the Annual Tables are a good indicator of the great impact of research on the natural sciences, we encourage students to apply their findings and other scientific results such as data, software and intellectual property when considering research quality and institutional performance.”
Source Journal Reference: Gemma Conroy & Benjamin Plackett, Nature Index Annual Tables 2022: China’s research spending pays off, Nature News (2022), https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01669-0
