The Swedish Academy of Literature announced on October 2 that the 2003 Nobel literature prize was awarded to J.M. Coetzeee from South Africa. This is followed by the decision of Karolinska Institute to award the medicine prize to Paul C. Lauterbur, an American, and Sir Peter Mansfield, a British on Oct 6. And Oct. 7 witnessed the Swedish Royal Academy of Science afford its prize to the trio, the laureates for physics prize from Russia, America, and Britain.
No Chinese name has so far been found at least on the list of the winners for the six prizes. Though we've never taken Nobel prize as the only criterion for the progress of national science, technology and culture yet no matter what a complicated feeling we bear in mind cannot deny the fact that no Nobel prize has ever been awarded to scientific results out from the Chinese soil is something regrettable for the Chinese sci-tech circle. However in the meantime when we are either worried about it or optimistically claim that we are only a "step" away from the honor we have to ponder it over.
What the Nobel evaluates is the revolutionary contributions of profound significance and the original creation by its winners through a long time endeavor in their fields, the elementary scientific researches which exert great impact on the progress of civilization and social development for the whole mankind. It is, to some extent, a comprehensive assessment on the development of science and technology of a country, including the evolution history of modern science in that country, investment put into the science and technology by government and society, and the national economy as a whole. In this sense, we are apparently slow to go along with the current in terms of stable and sustained input and output in the sci-tech field and the research system as well.
First of all, it manifests itself in the field of scientific competitiveness. According to "The World Competitiveness Yearbook" issued by International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne, Switzerland, the GDP ratio of investment for China's sci-tech R & D is lower than that of many countries, the ratio per capita even lower than that of India, another developing country in Asia and some others. In terms of the total number of sci-tech research essays and the basic resource mobilization for sci-tech research, China's sci-tech competitiveness is overall on a par with that of India, weaker than that of South Korea, and far behind that that of the developed countries, such as the US and Japan.
The other insufficiencies lie in the scientific research system. For example, the prerequisite for an application for fund of scientific research is to achieve certain results within three to five years after the fund is in place. However, as experts pointed out, any discovery of genuine significance is not possible within so tight a schedule. On the other hand, the elementary theory in China, on which research is based, needs upgrading. The outbreak of SARS epidemic last spring in our country has also reminded us of the very limited sharing of information within the sci-tech contingents, the existence of factional disputes and even less adequate cooperation in the research of cross-disciplinary subjects.
As to the reserve of talents for researches the outflow of top talents deserves our great attention. In recent few years, the number of undergraduates going abroad from some well-known universities in China hit a high rate as 15 percent annually. For Americans, they don't have to do anything but set up two "harvesters TOFEL and GRE in China, they can easily reap the best fruits from China's education," namely, to breed away from China the most promising Nobel winners in future. Three years have gone by since Beijing Evening Paper reported this on October 15, 2000. But does the thing stand now? Has it got a turn for the better?"
It's undeniable that we need a Nobel Prize. This is a long-cherished complex of the Chinese nation. However, the dream will remain a dream if we cannot put in order some relations including the aforesaid insufficiencies. On the other hand, it is intrinsically necessary and urgent for us to solve the problem for sci-tech investment and system, even though we are not going in for the Nobel Prize. Science and technology is the primary productivity and motive force for the sustainable and healthy development of a country, on which is based the prosperity of a nation, the well being of her people and the progress of the society. This is what we should keep clear in mind. And probably, it is the very reason why we have to get a Nobel Prize.
(People's Daily October 13, 2003)
