The state of world science: the United States and Europe ahead of everyone, but China is quickly catching up
According to the law [of the USA], the National Science Foundation is obliged to assess the state of research and innovation every two years. This time just came, and the NSF prepared its report “Scientific and engineering indicators” for submission to the US Congress and the President. The report as a whole is optimistic, the successful search for means of financing science responds well in terms of the number of jobs and the state of the industry. But he emphasizes the change in global focus, according to which China and South Korea are investing heavily in research and technology.
Science is multifaceted, so it will not be possible to derive a single measure describing the world scientific progress. NSF has studied 42 different indicators that track parameters such as research funding, business investment, training of scientists, and so on. All parameters were evaluated around the world in order to compare with the scientific activity of the United States.
In general, the financing of science is on a good schedule. In 2005, the world spent just under a trillion dollars on research and development; in 2015, $ 2 trillion was taken. In general, 75 countries spend 10% of this amount; in order of decreasing spending, these are the USA, China, Japan, Germany, South Korea, France, India, Britain. The United States, spending 10 billion dollars a decade ago, is spending $ 400 billion today.
This growth gradually shifts the focus of world science. At the beginning of the century, Europe and the United States together were responsible for 65% of global spending on research and development. Now they account for less than half.
In the US, business spent money mainly on research, but it was mostly applied research and product development. In the field of fundamental science, business is responsible for about a quarter of spending. Universities, private charitable foundations, government investments together cover the remaining funding; However, such studies receive only 17% of budget spending. All sources of science funding do not increase or decrease their contributions in the last five years.
From the federal budget, a little more than half goes to the defense industry, mainly to the development of products. Half of the rest is spent on health care, which mainly deals with basic research.
In terms of supporting the population ready to do science, the situation is a bit mixed. US students have slightly improved exam results, but not significantly - the indicators are slightly better than the average for internationally accepted science estimates, slightly worse for math.
A bachelor's degree in mathematics and science gets about a third of all bachelors in the United States. Over the current century, the number of such diplomas has increased from 250,000 to 800,000. This puts the United States on a par with the eight largest countries in Europe. China also increased the number of diplomas from 400,000 to 1.6 million. India and China jointly give out about half of the diplomas in the world.
In the field of doctoral degrees, China is not growing so fast. The eight largest countries in Europe have an advantage; they give out about 60,000 doctoral degrees annually. The USA remains the largest country in this area, and is responsible for 40,000 degrees; about a third of them go to foreign students. The chart of China, despite its height, leveled out a bit at around 30,000 degrees. Doctoral degrees are extremely important both for basic research that feeds business and technological innovation, as well as for providing a workforce capable of using research results and developing ways to apply them.
What happens with all these students and money? The standard measure of research activity is the number of scientific publications. The money seems to correlate with the results, since the most publications are issued by the United States and China. The European Union is overtaking China in the number of biomedical publications, and this is the largest area of research in the number of publications. There are questions about the quality of Chinese research, but researchers in this country are issuing a growing number of the most cited works. Oddly enough, Switzerland is in the lead by this metric.
China's growth is also evident in the field of “services with a high scientific share,” which includes the analysis of financial data and the storage of digital case histories. China has overtaken Japan, which is in third place, and is approaching the European Union, in which this segment has been in stagnation for ten years (in the United States, ranking first, it is growing). For high-tech manufacturing, China has bypassed both the European Union and Japan.
Another measure of research productivity used by the NSF is the successful transfer of knowledge to the market. There is no global information in this area, so research concentrates on the US market. US patents show that basic research by research institutes remains the main supplier of patents. Most (60-70%) information from patents comes from academic studies. Patents directly originated in institutions have also increased in number over the period in the last five years.
The report notes that the federal government is also engaged in the transfer of technology in the industry directly. The Department of Energy is the largest source of such broadcasts, followed by the Ministry of Defense and NASA.
Developing and supporting the education of scientists and extensive research programs require substantial public support. In the United States, this is reflected in the fact that 40% of citizens express greater confidence in the research community - more citizens trust only the military. From 85% to 95% agree that scientists want to help humanity and help solve problems - and this percentage has not changed in the current century. More than 80% of people believe that the federal government should continue to sponsor basic research.
In this case, the report noted that the public and the scientific community do not always agree. Only a little more than half of the citizens expressed serious concern about climate change - and this topic is of concern to the majority of scientists. This almost coincides with the percentage of people who are similarly related to nuclear energy - and its scientists consider it only a partial solution to the problem of climate change. Most scientists believe that genetically modified food is safe, but more than 40% of the public has doubts about it - the percentage of doubters has risen sharply since 2010, when it was 25. So, despite great respect for scientists, the public either does not know their opinion or does not agree with him.
In general, the report is not engaged in the analysis and does not make suggestions. Its goal is to provide lawmakers with raw material on which to make informed decisions. Apparently, he supports the main topics promoted by science: basic, fundamental research provides raw material for innovation, and many people who transform science into technology have been nurtured by an academic education system. This whole system is highly dependent on public support.
China, it seems, has carefully studied these lessons, and is aggressively moving towards the leading scientific countries of the world; the report notes that South Korea, despite being much smaller, was also able to make significant steps in this direction. But the United States, which is leading today in many indicators, puts the fundamentals of innovation at risk. The Trump administration’s call to seriously cut funding for science, and the recently adopted tax plan, raise questions about the extent to which the US is ready to continue to support basic research programs.
The full report is available here . [ Coincidentally, at the time of preparation of the translation, the NSF site is not working - like all US government organizations, the fund is closed for an indefinite time required to resolve disputes over the budget for the next fiscal year between Congress and the government ].
Science is multifaceted, so it will not be possible to derive a single measure describing the world scientific progress. NSF has studied 42 different indicators that track parameters such as research funding, business investment, training of scientists, and so on. All parameters were evaluated around the world in order to compare with the scientific activity of the United States.
Show me the money
In general, the financing of science is on a good schedule. In 2005, the world spent just under a trillion dollars on research and development; in 2015, $ 2 trillion was taken. In general, 75 countries spend 10% of this amount; in order of decreasing spending, these are the USA, China, Japan, Germany, South Korea, France, India, Britain. The United States, spending 10 billion dollars a decade ago, is spending $ 400 billion today.
This growth gradually shifts the focus of world science. At the beginning of the century, Europe and the United States together were responsible for 65% of global spending on research and development. Now they account for less than half.
In the US, business spent money mainly on research, but it was mostly applied research and product development. In the field of fundamental science, business is responsible for about a quarter of spending. Universities, private charitable foundations, government investments together cover the remaining funding; However, such studies receive only 17% of budget spending. All sources of science funding do not increase or decrease their contributions in the last five years.
From the federal budget, a little more than half goes to the defense industry, mainly to the development of products. Half of the rest is spent on health care, which mainly deals with basic research.
In terms of supporting the population ready to do science, the situation is a bit mixed. US students have slightly improved exam results, but not significantly - the indicators are slightly better than the average for internationally accepted science estimates, slightly worse for math.
A bachelor's degree in mathematics and science gets about a third of all bachelors in the United States. Over the current century, the number of such diplomas has increased from 250,000 to 800,000. This puts the United States on a par with the eight largest countries in Europe. China also increased the number of diplomas from 400,000 to 1.6 million. India and China jointly give out about half of the diplomas in the world.
In the field of doctoral degrees, China is not growing so fast. The eight largest countries in Europe have an advantage; they give out about 60,000 doctoral degrees annually. The USA remains the largest country in this area, and is responsible for 40,000 degrees; about a third of them go to foreign students. The chart of China, despite its height, leveled out a bit at around 30,000 degrees. Doctoral degrees are extremely important both for basic research that feeds business and technological innovation, as well as for providing a workforce capable of using research results and developing ways to apply them.
Implementation
What happens with all these students and money? The standard measure of research activity is the number of scientific publications. The money seems to correlate with the results, since the most publications are issued by the United States and China. The European Union is overtaking China in the number of biomedical publications, and this is the largest area of research in the number of publications. There are questions about the quality of Chinese research, but researchers in this country are issuing a growing number of the most cited works. Oddly enough, Switzerland is in the lead by this metric.
China's growth is also evident in the field of “services with a high scientific share,” which includes the analysis of financial data and the storage of digital case histories. China has overtaken Japan, which is in third place, and is approaching the European Union, in which this segment has been in stagnation for ten years (in the United States, ranking first, it is growing). For high-tech manufacturing, China has bypassed both the European Union and Japan.
Another measure of research productivity used by the NSF is the successful transfer of knowledge to the market. There is no global information in this area, so research concentrates on the US market. US patents show that basic research by research institutes remains the main supplier of patents. Most (60-70%) information from patents comes from academic studies. Patents directly originated in institutions have also increased in number over the period in the last five years.
The report notes that the federal government is also engaged in the transfer of technology in the industry directly. The Department of Energy is the largest source of such broadcasts, followed by the Ministry of Defense and NASA.
Public support
Developing and supporting the education of scientists and extensive research programs require substantial public support. In the United States, this is reflected in the fact that 40% of citizens express greater confidence in the research community - more citizens trust only the military. From 85% to 95% agree that scientists want to help humanity and help solve problems - and this percentage has not changed in the current century. More than 80% of people believe that the federal government should continue to sponsor basic research.
In this case, the report noted that the public and the scientific community do not always agree. Only a little more than half of the citizens expressed serious concern about climate change - and this topic is of concern to the majority of scientists. This almost coincides with the percentage of people who are similarly related to nuclear energy - and its scientists consider it only a partial solution to the problem of climate change. Most scientists believe that genetically modified food is safe, but more than 40% of the public has doubts about it - the percentage of doubters has risen sharply since 2010, when it was 25. So, despite great respect for scientists, the public either does not know their opinion or does not agree with him.
In general, the report is not engaged in the analysis and does not make suggestions. Its goal is to provide lawmakers with raw material on which to make informed decisions. Apparently, he supports the main topics promoted by science: basic, fundamental research provides raw material for innovation, and many people who transform science into technology have been nurtured by an academic education system. This whole system is highly dependent on public support.
China, it seems, has carefully studied these lessons, and is aggressively moving towards the leading scientific countries of the world; the report notes that South Korea, despite being much smaller, was also able to make significant steps in this direction. But the United States, which is leading today in many indicators, puts the fundamentals of innovation at risk. The Trump administration’s call to seriously cut funding for science, and the recently adopted tax plan, raise questions about the extent to which the US is ready to continue to support basic research programs.
The full report is available here . [ Coincidentally, at the time of preparation of the translation, the NSF site is not working - like all US government organizations, the fund is closed for an indefinite time required to resolve disputes over the budget for the next fiscal year between Congress and the government ].
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/409633/