After Topping Global Research Output, Will China Embrace Original Innovation?

The newly released 2023 Nature Index Annual Tables show that,Based on 2022 publication data, China has surpassed the United States to become the country making the largest contribution to high-quality natural science research.。

The latest Nature Index annual rankings highlight a clear trend in the natural sciences: Western countries are losing their edge, while China continues to make progress. Underpinning this established pattern is evidence of the rise of Chinese scientific research.

So, an obvious question,“After the fierce competition over quantity, will the focus of Chinese scientific research shift to innovation?”

An investor once candidly admitted to VCBeat that China has fewer than ten instances of genuine original innovation. In fact, the level of innovative contribution in Chinese academic papers has consistently lagged behind that of Europe and the United States. Although the total number of internationally co-authored papers from China continued to grow between 2020 and 2022, compared with major global scientific and technological powers, China’s basic research faces numerous challenges, including insufficient investment, a single-source funding structure, a lack of influential scientific achievements, weak original innovation capacity, and an inability of technology supply to meet enterprises’ demands for cutting-edge technological innovation.

Basic research, by addressing scientific questions, can give rise to major technologies and applications; applied research often triggers breakthroughs in significant scientific questions, thereby enabling the derivation of common principles from diverse application paradigms. Academician Jin Li, President of Fudan University, has publicly stated:“True original innovation stems from basic research.”

Original innovation refers to a completely new form of innovation that has never existed before, one that does not rely on prior knowledge or technology. Original innovation is disruptive, capable of fundamentally transforming industries or society, and exerts long-term impact. For example, the discovery of electricity sparked the electrification revolution. In contrast, basic research refers to fundamental investigative work conducted to explore and discover new scientific knowledge, principles, laws, and other foundational elements; it is typically not directly applied to practical production or daily life.

The relationship between the two lies in,Original innovation is built upon a substantial accumulation of basic research.

The accumulation of extensive basic research can provide a solid foundation for original innovation. The outcomes of basic research offer theoretical support and practical guidance for subsequent studies, helping researchers better understand the essence and underlying laws of phenomena, thereby advancing scientific and technological development. Furthermore, findings from basic research can inspire new ideas and methodologies for applied research, leading to more effective solutions for practical applications. In addition, basic research cultivates researchers’ innovative capabilities and thinking approaches, stimulating their spirit of exploration and creativity, thus fostering the emergence of original innovations.

Therefore, compared to incremental innovations in basic research, original innovation is more challenging, requiring greater investment and entailing higher risks, with substantial groundwork needed in the early stages.

Beyond Incremental Innovation: Has the Era of Original Innovation in Chinese Scientific Research Truly Arrived?

Before answering this question, it is important to note that original innovations are typically driven and realized by universities, pioneering enterprises, startups, or individuals. Original innovation can span various fields, such as basic science, engineering, healthcare, information technology, environment, and energy. Some notable examples of original innovation include mobile internet, artificial intelligence, 3D printing, and gene editing.

To achieve original innovation, the following conditions must be met:

1. Supportive policies: The government needs to provide regulatory, policy, and financial support to promote innovative development;

2. Innovation Culture: Establish a culture that encourages innovation, experimentation, and acceptance of failure, while providing the foundation, environment, and resources for innovation;

3. A robust research and development team, comprising skilled technical professionals and cross-disciplinary experts, to design and develop new products, technologies, or services;

4. Market Opportunity: There must be sufficient market opportunities to drive the research and development and implementation of new products or technologies;

5. Partners are required to establish partnerships with other enterprises, non-profit organizations, or government agencies to provide technology, human resources, funding, or other resources.

Take the rise of American technological innovation after World War II as an example. Vannevar Bush, Director of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), asserted that “the government should assume the responsibility of fostering the generation of new scientific knowledge and nurturing young scientists.” The government must provide ample and dynamic funding for scientific research. Such funding must be capable of attracting the finest scientists, offering compelling research opportunities and adequate compensation.

At its peak, Bush led 30,000 people, including 6,000 scientists, encompassing approximately two-thirds of all physicists in the United States. This was accompanied by a dramatic surge in research funding: in 1938, federal and state government expenditures on scientific research accounted for 0.076% of the U.S. national income; by 1944, this figure had risen to 0.5%, with the majority of these funds disbursed through the National Defense Research Committee.

In the years that followed, the U.S. government continuously provided substantial funding to foster collaboration between universities and private enterprises, thereby creating a “postwar innovation machine.” In 1944, the GI Bill spurred enrollment expansion in higher education institutions, cultivating a large pool of engineering and technical professionals. As emerging industries took off, they created numerous unprecedented job opportunities. Over the next two decades, wages for both high school and college graduates in the United States rose significantly. From 1940 to 1964, federal R&D spending increased twentyfold; at its peak in the 1960s, such expenditure accounted for approximately 2% of GDP, equivalent to roughly $400 billion in today’s terms.

At the same time,Scientific Innovation in Private Enterprises Is Also Rising Rapidly。

The innovations of U.S. private companies such as Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Google have received virtually no government support; they were driven entirely by internal self-motivation for the purposes of competition and survival. Meanwhile, privately funded laboratories at Stanford University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Washington, the University of California, and Johns Hopkins University have played a significant role in major American innovations.

In China, according to the Statistical Bulletin on National Investment in Scientific and Technological Activities in 2022 (hereinafter referred to as the "Bulletin"), the total national expenditure on research and experimental development (R&D) reached RMB 3,078.29 billion in 2022, an increase of RMB 282.66 billion over the previous year, representing a growth of 10.1%. The R&D intensity stood at 2.54%, up by 0.11 percentage points from the previous year.

Currently, China has moved beyond the entrepreneurial era dominated by “domestic substitution” under traditional business models, with most of the low-hanging fruit already harvested. Future opportunities will increasingly favor innovative enterprises that possess genuine original technologies and meet clinical needs. Therefore, R&D investment must demonstrate greater commitment than in the past. However, compared with technology powerhouses such as the United States, China’s R&D expenditure in 2022 amounted to only 64.18% of the U.S. figure, which stood at $713.2 billion.

This issue is not only attributable to the gap in research funding expenditure, but is also inextricably linked to factors such as the allocation of research funds, the disconnect between researchers and the market, and the distribution of researchers’ time and energy.

This August, an “Audit Report on Guangxi’s Science and Education Revitalization Funds” released by the Guangxi Provincial Audit Office trended online. The report revealed that one university had received a cumulative total of RMB 131 million in fiscal research funding, carried out 862 research projects, yet achieved zero outcomes in terms of result transformation.

131 million yuan in research funding must support 862 projects, meaning each project receives only a few hundred thousand yuan. For long-cycle, high-cost research projects in fields such as science and engineering or life sciences, this limited funding is insufficient to support the completion of technology transfer, let alone bringing the project to market within one year. Therefore, some netizens have commented that “zero commercialization” is understandable.

As for innovative enterprises, there is even more of a bubble. “So many domestic biotech companies claim to be innovative, but in reality they are still following the old path that Chinese pharmaceutical companies have taken for decades,” with most firms focusing primarily on incremental innovation. “Many pharmaceutical companies are not sufficiently committed to basic scientific research, which is truly a lamentable aspect of China’s scientific research landscape,” remarked a practitioner in the biopharmaceutical industry.

In the article “How Can We Strengthen Original Innovation and Cultivate ‘Einsteins’ in China?”, it is stated that “original innovation stems from two primary sources: the first is driven by interest, as exemplified by Newton’s discovery of universal gravitation or Einstein’s formulation of the theory of relativity; the second is problem-oriented, such as the discovery of artemisinin for combating malaria and various explorations into new energy sources undertaken to address climate change.”

Regardless of the type of original innovation, creative talent is essential. High-level research universities are the primary force in cultivating such talent.

Among the series of university technology transfer models analyzed by Chengguo Bureau, it is evident that major universities are making significant efforts to attract scientific research talent. To recruit high-level professionals, Soochow University offers substantial compensation packages. According to the university’s official website in July 2023, in addition to covering “standard” provisions such as research and living expenses, Soochow University provides personal subsidies of no less than RMB 4.5 million for distinguished professors and top-tier talents, with total compensation exceeding RMB 10 million. Consequently, Soochow University has been dubbed the “Talent Excavator” by external observers.

Not only in the cultivation of scientific research talent, but also in vigorously promoting original innovation, Fu Xiaolan, Professor at the University of Oxford and Director of the Centre for Technology and Management Development, has publicly stated that China needs to make efforts in the following six areas:

1. Cultivate and foster an environment that encourages a hundred flowers to bloom, promotes innovation, and tolerates diverse ideas;

2. Build a high-level, open scientific research and innovation system;

3. Reform of the education system to foster a social and educational environment that encourages creative activities;

4. Adopt innovation policies that adhere to the principle of competitive neutrality;

5. Strengthen the reform of innovation systems and mechanisms;

6. Respect the inherent laws governing innovation activities.

References

“Boosting Original Innovation Capacity Still Requires Overcoming Steep Challenges”

“From Basic Research to Original Innovation”

"Representative Jin Li: True Original Innovation Stems from Basic Research"

"How Can We Strengthen Original Innovation to Cultivate 'Einsteins' in China?"