The international contributions of Chinese science have been growing very rapidly. Chinese universities have been expanding enrollments at a 15% annual rate for the past twenty years, except for a short dip 1989 - 1992. Chinese science is moving away from the Soviet academy model and more science is being done in the universities and to a lesser extent in private industry. Widespread IPR violations are a significant discouragement to investment in R&D for Chinese companies.
The Influence of Chinese Science [Zhongguo Kexue de Yingxiangli], edited by Sun Chengquan, Xiao Xiantao. Kexue Chubanshe, Beijing, April 2005. ISBN 7-03-015100-3
The Influence of Chinese Science [Zhongguo Kexuede Yingxianli] is a 380-page study by the Chinese Academy of Science based primarily on the Science Citation Index measuring the influence (citations and citations per paper as a proxy for quality) of Chinese science papers for 1993 - 2003 in various scientific fields. Price: 38 RMB.
Here are my gleanings from the book, which highlights weaknesses as well as the growing strength of Chinese science.
The Science Citation Index charts the rapid rise in Chinese highly cited scientific publications. The average citation rates for Chinese papers appearing in high impact journals is considerably lower than the international average, reflecting a continuing quality lag.
The rate of Chinese patent applications at patent offices in Europe and the U.S. is very low, reflecting difficulty in transforming scientific work into innovative technology.
Much of the best scientific publications by Chinese scientists is done by Chinese at U.S., European or Japanese universities. Many of the top Chinese scientists cited have multiple affiliations such as China, Taiwan; China, U.S.; or even China, Taiwan, U.S.
(Pp. 25 -29) The dominance the Chinese Academy of Science has had over Chinese science is declining as some universities, led by Tsinghua University and Peking University but also by Zhejiang, Xi'an Jiaotong, Chinese S&T, Fudan, Shanghai Jiaotong, Harbin Industrial, Wuhan, and Xiamen universities. Chapters on various scientific fields compare the number of citations of Chinese publications in many subfields.
"Influence" doesn't confine itself to the Institute for Scientific Information's Science Citation Index but also examines many other indices of S&T work such as the Derwent Innovations Index (based on patent filings in many countries), the INSPEC (Information Service for Physics, Electronics and Computing (UK) and Chemical Abstracts.
"Influence" combines analysis of ten year and year-by-year international rankings of individuals and institutions in the SCI and other indices to outline, field by field, where Chinese science stands. (Pp. 30 - 31) Over the period examined, 1993 - 2003, the rate of increase in citations of work by Chinese scientists and engineers in many fields was much higher than for any other country. Chinese contributions to the international literature were most significant in chemistry, physics, materials science and engineering science. Judging by average citations per article in various fields, Chinese science had the greatest relative influence in mathematics and materials science and the least in agriculture and the life sciences.
The proportion of Chinese contributions was least in clinical medicine, molecular biology and genetics, neuroscience, behavioral science, immunology, psychopathology/psychology, and agricultural science. For both China and Russia, the rate of patent applications compared with other countries was significantly less than the rate of citation of scientific articles.
[My take on this: The Science Citation Index, although it is one useful method of measuring achievement in world science, can be misleading if looked at in isolation as a Nature editorial pointed out recently (June 23, 2005). Nature pointed out that the citation index varies by type of content (review articles and the last article on a pro
Slashdot Mirror
The international contributions of Chinese science have been growing very rapidly. Chinese universities have been expanding enrollments at a 15% annual rate for the past twenty years, except for a short dip 1989 - 1992. Chinese science is moving away from the Soviet academy model and more science is being done in the universities and to a lesser extent in private industry. Widespread IPR violations are a significant discouragement to investment in R&D for Chinese companies.
The Influence of Chinese Science [Zhongguo Kexue de Yingxiangli], edited by Sun Chengquan, Xiao Xiantao. Kexue Chubanshe, Beijing, April 2005. ISBN 7-03-015100-3
The Influence of Chinese Science [Zhongguo Kexuede Yingxianli] is a 380-page study by the Chinese Academy of Science based primarily on the Science Citation Index measuring the influence (citations and citations per paper as a proxy for quality) of Chinese science papers for 1993 - 2003 in various scientific fields. Price: 38 RMB.
Here are my gleanings from the book, which highlights weaknesses as well as the growing strength of Chinese science.
The Science Citation Index charts the rapid rise in Chinese highly cited scientific publications. The average citation rates for Chinese papers appearing in high impact journals is considerably lower than the international average, reflecting a continuing quality lag.
The rate of Chinese patent applications at patent offices in Europe and the U.S. is very low, reflecting difficulty in transforming scientific work into innovative technology.
Much of the best scientific publications by Chinese scientists is done by Chinese at U.S., European or Japanese universities. Many of the top Chinese scientists cited have multiple affiliations such as China, Taiwan; China, U.S.; or even China, Taiwan, U.S.
(Pp. 25 -29) The dominance the Chinese Academy of Science has had over Chinese science is declining as some universities, led by Tsinghua University and Peking University but also by Zhejiang, Xi'an Jiaotong, Chinese S&T, Fudan, Shanghai Jiaotong, Harbin Industrial, Wuhan, and Xiamen universities. Chapters on various scientific fields compare the number of citations of Chinese publications in many subfields.
"Influence" doesn't confine itself to the Institute for Scientific Information's Science Citation Index but also examines many other indices of S&T work such as the Derwent Innovations Index (based on patent filings in many countries), the INSPEC (Information Service for Physics, Electronics and Computing (UK) and Chemical Abstracts.
"Influence" combines analysis of ten year and year-by-year international rankings of individuals and institutions in the SCI and other indices to outline, field by field, where Chinese science stands. (Pp. 30 - 31) Over the period examined, 1993 - 2003, the rate of increase in citations of work by Chinese scientists and engineers in many fields was much higher than for any other country. Chinese contributions to the international literature were most significant in chemistry, physics, materials science and engineering science. Judging by average citations per article in various fields, Chinese science had the greatest relative influence in mathematics and materials science and the least in agriculture and the life sciences.
The proportion of Chinese contributions was least in clinical medicine, molecular biology and genetics, neuroscience, behavioral science, immunology, psychopathology/psychology, and agricultural science. For both China and Russia, the rate of patent applications compared with other countries was significantly less than the rate of citation of scientific articles.
[My take on this: The Science Citation Index, although it is one useful method of measuring achievement in world science, can be misleading if looked at in isolation as a Nature editorial pointed out recently (June 23, 2005). Nature pointed out that the citation index varies by type of content (review articles and the last article on a pro