IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v37y2010i5p331-342.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

China is catching up in science and innovation: the experience of the Chinese Academy of Sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Xielin Liu
  • Tingting Zhi

Abstract

How can a developing country narrow its science and innovation gap with leading countries? The Knowledge Innovation Program (KIP) in the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) is a giant program for this purpose in China. This article investigates the scientific input and output of CAS since KIP started to be implemented ten years ago. Based on quantitative analysis, we can conclude from the results that KIP is a powerful policy tool for CAS to recruit talent, restructure CAS institutes, extend the researcher pool and introduce merit-based criteria. This has led CAS to narrow the science gap with leading countries; however, the innovation gap has still not been narrowed much. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Xielin Liu & Tingting Zhi, 2010. "China is catching up in science and innovation: the experience of the Chinese Academy of Sciences," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(5), pages 331-342, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:5:p:331-342
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234210X501162
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuandi Wang & Jason Li-Ying, 2014. "How do the BRIC countries play their roles in the global innovation arena? A study based on USPTO patents during 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1065-1083, February.
    2. Zhang, Yi & Chen, Kaihua & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "Scientific effects of Triple Helix interactions among research institutes, industries and universities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 86, pages 33-47.
    3. Yi Zhang & Kaihua Chen & Guilong Zhu & Richard C. M. Yam & Jiancheng Guan, 2016. "Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: an ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese Academy of Sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1383-1415, September.
    4. Karaulova, Maria & Shackleton, Oliver & Liu, Weishu & Gök, Abdullah & Shapira, Philip, 2017. "Institutional change and innovation system transformation: A tale of two academies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 196-207.
    5. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Zhu, Guilong & Mu, Rongping, 2020. "Do research institutes benefit from their network positions in research collaboration networks with industries or/and universities?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 94.
    6. Yuandi Wang & Jiashun Huang & Yantai Chen & Xiongfeng Pan & Jin Chen, 2013. "Have Chinese universities embraced their third mission? New insight from a business perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 207-222, November.
    7. Yawen Zou & Manfred D. Laubichler, 2017. "Measuring the contributions of Chinese scholars to the research field of systems biology from 2005 to 2013," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1615-1631, March.
    8. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Chao & Feng, Ze & Zhang, Yi & Ning, Lutao, 2022. "Technology transfer systems and modes of national research institutes: evidence from the Chinese academy of sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:5:p:331-342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.