Time, patience needed for Chinese Nobel science winner

This year's Nobel Prizes in physiology or medicine, physics and chemistry have been announced, with no winners of Chinese nationality, disappointing many.

Each fall, Chinese science and the Nobel Prize spark embarrassed conversation online. Chinese people have long had a "Nobel-complex." No Chinese scientist has won a Nobel prize in science in more than a century.

Though it is the world's second-largest economy and the largest goods-trading nation, China is not a scientific power and is still far less developed in terms of productivity compared with advanced nations. The gap lies in policies, government input, education and attitudes toward science.

Nobel prizes in science only recognize basic science, with results not benefiting people's lives until decades or centuries later.

Scientific studies should serve science itself, not popularity or bureaucracy. Few research findings will turn into real-life products immediately. They need time and patience.

China's fast growth in past decades has created economic miracles, but breeds a sense of eagerness for quick success and instant benefits in fields such as science and education.

Basic science should receive more support in China, where applied science, with its quicker results, has attracted the attention of policymakers who allocate research funds.

Certainly, applied science quickly pushes social progress, but basic science will do the same in the long run. Policymakers should adopt a balanced approach in allocating academic spending and putting forward policies.

A system centered on scientists rather than bureaucracy values academic manpower and creates a better innovative environment, freeing researchers of bureaucratic concerns and distractions, such as the tiring process of applying for research outlays.

Government spending on science and the respect a country shows for science is key to scientific development. The United States has invested heavily in basic science through both government and private capital. Many foreign scientists, including Albert Einstein, went to the U.S. during World War II, adding to America's technological strength.

China's spending on research and development (R&D) accounted for 2.08 percent of the GDP last year. Although it is a small percentage compared with technological powers, the figure has been growing steadily in recent years. The percentage was only 0.57 percent in 1995.

Education, likewise, should encourage an innovative spirit and independent thinking, which is just what China's educational system lacks and has led to an outcry for reform for years. Rote learning and memorization, which Chinese schools use in teaching, are to blame.

Last month, China adopted a decade-long plan to overhaul its college entrance exam and university enrollment system in order to improve fairness, ease the intense pressure on students, and cultivate creative thinkers, as the overemphasis on numerical scores in the current system hinders students' innovative ability.

The low-hanging fruit of China's fast economic development over past decades has been picked. Reforms in scientific and educational systems need more time and effort. A Chinese Nobel prize in science, as such, requires patience.