In the May 2000 issue of Reason Magazine, award-winning science correspondent Ronald Bailey wrote an excellent article titled “Earth Day, Then and Now”
to provide some historical perspective on the 30th anniversary of Earth
Day. In that article, Bailey noted that around the time of the first
Earth Day in the 1970, and in the years following, there was a “torrent
of apocalyptic predictions” and many of those predictions were featured
in his Reason article. Well, it’s now the 47th anniversary of Earth
Day, and a good time to ask the question again that Bailey asked 17
years ago: How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the
first Earth Day in 1970? The answer: “The prophets of doom were not
simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong,” according to Bailey. Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started:
1. Harvard biologist George Wald
estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless
immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
2. “We are in an environmental crisis
which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a
suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University
biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal
Environment.
3. The day after the first Earth Day, the
New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and
conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the
race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”
4. “Population will inevitably and
completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,”
Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle.
“The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per
year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
5. “Most of the people who are going to
die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been
born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe!
“By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the
present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of
unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the
ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of
the 1980s.”
6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist
scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring
readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65
million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.”
7. “It is already too late to avoid mass
starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in
the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.
8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State
University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost
unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines
will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India,
Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or
conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine
conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world,
with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will
be in famine.”
9. In January 1970, Life
reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence
to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will
have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution
will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time
that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of
time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our
land will be usable.”
11. Barry Commoner predicted that
decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s
rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.
12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in
1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of
thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a
scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog
disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.
13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon
that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially
reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned
that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49
years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this
expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Note:
According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years).
14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By
the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil
at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up
to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very
sorry, there isn’t any.'”
15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American
that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally
run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver
would be gone before 1990.
16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look
that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute,
believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all
the species of living animals will be extinct.”
17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that
“since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will
be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected
that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”
18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending
Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about
twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will
be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990,
but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it
would take to put us into an ice age.”
MP: Let’s keep those spectacularly wrong predictions
from the first Earth Day 1970 in mind when we’re bombarded in the next
few days with media hype, and claims like this from the 2017 Earth Day website:
Global sea levels are rising at an alarmingly fast
rate — 6.7 inches in the last century alone and going higher. Surface
temperatures are setting new heat records about each year. The ice
sheets continue to decline, glaciers are in retreat globally, and our
oceans are more acidic than ever. We could go on…which is a whole other
problem.
The majority of scientists are in agreement that human contributions
to the greenhouse effect are the root cause. Essentially, gases in the
atmosphere – such as methane and CO2 – trap heat and block it from
escaping our planet. So what happens next? More droughts and heat waves, which can have devastating effects on the poorest countries and communities. Hurricanes will intensify and occur more frequently. Sea levels could rise up to four feet by 2100 – and that’s a conservative estimate among experts.
Reality Check/Inconvenient Facts:
1. From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Annual Report for 2016, we’re actually in the longest major hurricane drought in US history of 11 years (and counting):
The last major hurricane (Category 3 or stronger) to make landfall in the US was Wilma on NovemberOctober
24, 2005 (DJS note: despite 2017 major hurricane strikes (which were really just bad luck) 2018 once again is shaping up to be a subdued hurricane sesaon). This major hurricane drought [of more than 11 years]
surpassed the previous record of eight years from 1861-1868 when no
major hurricane struck the coast of the United States. On average, a
major hurricane makes landfall in the U.S. about once every three years.
2. The frequency of hurricanes in the US has been declining, see top
chart above that shows the hurricane count (all Categories 1 to 5) in
the first seven years of each decade back to the 1850s, based on NOAA data here.
In the seven years between 2010 and 2016, there were only eight
hurricanes (all Category 1 and 2), which is the lowest number of
hurricanes during the first seven years of any decade in the history of
NOAA’s data back to 1850. It’s also far lower than the previous low of
14 hurricanes during the period from 1900 to 1906.
3. What you probably won’t hear about from the Earth Day supporters
is the amazing “decarbonization” of the United States over the last
decade or so, as the falling CO2 emissions in the bottom chart above
illustrate, even as CO2 emissions from energy consumption have been
rising throughout most of the rest of the world. Energy-related carbon
emissions in the US have been falling since the 2007 peak, and were at
their lowest level last year in nearly a quarter century, going back to
1992. And the environmentalists and the “Earth Day” movement really had
very little to do with this amazing “greening” of America. Rather, it’s
mostly because of hydraulic fracturing and the increasing substitution
of natural gas for coal as a fuel source for electric power, see related
CD post here.
Finally, think about this question, posed by Ronald Bailey in 2000: What will Earth look like when Earth Day 60 rolls around in 2030?
Bailey predicts a much cleaner, and much richer future world, with less
hunger and malnutrition, less poverty, and longer life expectancy, and
with lower mineral and metal prices. But he makes one final prediction
about Earth Day 2030: “There will be a disproportionately influential
group of doomsters predicting that the future–and the present–never
looked so bleak.” In other words, the hype, hysteria and spectacularly
wrong apocalyptic predictions will continue, promoted by the
“environmental grievance hustlers.”
Thirty years of continued false climate
alarms have sounded since climate change scientists started making their
cataclysmic predictions that global manmade pollutants will
catastrophically rise global temperatures to the point of killing off
crops, mankind and other species – not to mention diminishing habitable
land by rising sea levels due to melting icecaps.
Institute for Energy Research (IER) Founder and CEO Rob Bradley, Jr., considers a New York Times (NYT)
story by Philip Shabecoff titled “Global Warming Has Begun” as ushering
in three decades of continuous prophesies that would go unfilled to the
dismay of climate change activists around the world.
“If the current pace of the buildup of
these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9
degrees Fahrenheit [between now and] the year 2025 to 2050,” Shabecoff wrote in his June 24, 1988, NYT piece.
“The rise in global temperature is predicted to … caus[e] sea levels to
rise by one to four feet by the middle of the next century.”
Joining the party
That year, Shabecoff’s alarmism blaming
industrialized society was buttressed by two scientists’ bogus
predictions – a trend that has seen one ominous climate forecast after
another fail … year after year.
“[P]redictions made on that day – and ever since – continue to be falsified in the real world,” Bradley stressed in his report.
“The predictions made by climate scientist James Hansen and Michael
Oppenheimer back in 1988 – and reported as model projected by journalist
Philip Shabecoff – constitute yet another exaggerated Malthusian scare,
joining those of the population bomb (Paul Ehrlich), resource
exhaustion (Club of Rome), Peak Oil (M. King Hubbert), and global
cooling (John Holdren).”
The pseudo-science based on the concept of
global warming scared mainstream media connoisseurs and easily
influenced students attending America’s public schools and universities,
who have been taught that crops and people would soon die if society
doesn’t adopt ultra-green environmentalists practices and policies to
“save the Earth.”
“Dire predictions of global warming and
sea-level rise are well on their way to being falsified – and by a lot –
not a little,” Bradley pointed out. “Meanwhile, a CO2-led global
greening has occurred, and climate-related deaths have plummeted as
industrialization and prosperity have overcome statism in many areas of
the world. Take the mid-point of the above’s predicted warming, six
degrees … at the 30-year mark, how is it looking? The increase is about 1
degree – and largely holding (the much-discussed ‘pause’ or ‘warming
hiatus’) – and remember, the world has naturally warmed since the end of
the Little Ice Age to the present, a good thing if climate economists
are to be believed.”
Surprising to many, during the last full
year in office of ultra-green former President Barack Obama, NASA
revealed a study proving the opposite of what climate change alarmists
have been warning the world about – showing that more carbon dioxide in
the air produced by pollutants is actually making vegetation flourish …
not die off or shrivel away.
“From a quarter to half of Earth’s
vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years,
largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to
a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25,” NASA reported in April 2016.
“An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight
countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from
NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution
Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount
of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening
represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area
to two times the continental United States.”
Drowning alert downsized
Photos of drowning polar bears clinging
onto the last piece of floating sea ice are drawing less fearful
compassion today and becoming more satirical as scientific evidence
shows that beaches and islands are not disappearing due to rising sea
levels – which have been greatly exaggerated.
Bradley pointed to climate scientist
Judith Curry, who admitted that manmade pollutants have little to do
with sea-level rise, as decades before and after the 1980s have shown
increases of just a few inches – and the rate has not been getting
noticeably greater of late.
“The rate of sea level rise during the period ~1925–1960 is as large as the rate of sea level rise the past few decades,” Curry explained. “Human
emissions of CO2 mostly grew after 1950; so, humans don’t seem to be to
blame for the early 20th century sea level rise, nor for the sea level
rise in the 19th and late 18th centuries.”
Former Vice President Al Gore – who has
made millions as a climate alarmist after serving under former President
Bill Clinton – has been one of the major proponents who has sold the
world on the notion of rising sea levels.
“The sky-is-falling pitch went from bad to
worse when scientist James Hansen was joined by politician Al Gore,”
Bradley noted. “Sea levels could rise 20 feet, claimed Gore in his 2006
documentary, An Inconvenient Truth – a prediction that has brought rebuke even from those sympathetic to the climate cause.”
Gore’s gross exaggerations didn’t stop in the sea, but extended to the skies.
“In the same book/movie, Al
Gore prophesied that unless the world dramatically reduced greenhouse
gasses, we would hit a ‘point of no return,’” Bradley stressed. “In his
book review of Gore’s effort, James Hansen unequivocally stated, ‘We
have at most 10 years – not 10 years to decide upon action, but 10 years
to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.’”
But for years, Gore has racked up hundreds
of thousands of dollars per speaking event to scare environmentalists
and gullible students into believing that his scare tactics are not
based in profit, but in scientific fact.
“Time is up on Gore’s ‘point of no return’
and Hansen’s ‘critical tipping point,’” Bradley continued. “But neither
has owned up to their exaggeration or made new predictions – as if they
will suddenly be proven right.”
Leaders across the globe championing climate change policies
The world’s most prestigious universities,
as well as the United Nations – which Trump has parted ways with on
issues from climate change to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – are
also behind the climate change movement, as the lead of the U.N.’s
climate panel, Rajendra Pachauri, made a “scare-and-hide” prediction the
first year of Obama’s second term.
“While head of a United Nations climate
panel, he pleaded that without drastic action before 2012, it would be
too late to save the planet,” Bradley pointed out. “In the same year,
Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at the University of
Cambridge, predicted ‘global disaster’ from the demise of Arctic sea ice
in four years. He too, has gone quiet. Nothing new, back in the late
1980s, the U.N. claimed that if global warming were not checked by 2000,
rising sea levels would wash entire countries away.”
The former leader of the United Kingdom also aired his hysterical panic about climate change.
“In 2009, then-British Prime Minister
Gordon Brown predicted that the world had only 50 days to save the
planet from global warming,” the climate change cynic recalled. “But 50
days, six months, and eight years later, the Earth seems fine.”
Trump not trumped by Dem climate alarmists
One of the major issues brought up by
Democrats at the last presidential election was that Trump would cause
the end of the world by not casting billions of American tax dollars
into climate change initiatives and projects around the world – an idea
championed by Obama and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
“The Democratic Party Platform heading
into the 2016 election compared the fight against global warming to
World War II,” Bradley recounted.
Republicans have been blamed with starting a war against the Earth itself.
Conservatives not on board with climate alarmists have been labeled as being much worse than mere polluters.
“Those opposed to a new ‘war effort’ were
compared to everything from Nazis to Holocaust deniers,” Bradley
explained. “Heading into the 2016 election, Washington Post columnist
Eugene Robinson warned that ‘a vote for Trump is a vote for climate
catastrophe.’ In Mother Jones, professor Michael Klare similarly argued
that ‘electing green-minded leaders, stopping climate deniers (or
ignorers) from capturing high office, and opposing fossil fueled
ultranationalism is the only realistic path to a habitable planet.’”
Regardless, Trump won – to the chagrin of many ultra-environmentalist Democrats.
“Donald Trump’s climate policies would create dozens of failed states south of the U.S. border and around the world,” Think Progress’ Joe Romm lamented. “It would be a world where everyone eventually becomes a veteran, a refugee, or a casualty of war.”
This opinion was mirrored by others in the leftist media who complained about the president.
“Donald Trump is going to be president of
the United States, [and] we’re at risk of departing from the stable
climatic conditions that sustained civilization for thousands of years
and lurching into the unknown,” Vox’s Brad Plumer warned.
“The world’s poorest countries, in particular, are ill-equipped to
handle this disruption. Renewable energy researcher John
Abraham contended that Trump’s election means we’ve ‘missed our last
off-ramp on the road to catastrophic climate change.’ Not to be outdone,
academic Noam Chomsky argued that Trump is aiding ‘the destruction of
organized human life.’”
Bleak future to climate alarmists
Curry complained before United States Congress that climate change has sounded off false alarms and compromised science.
“In their efforts to promote their
‘cause,’ the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue
has been drawn into the trap of seriously understating the uncertainties
associated with the climate problem,” Curry declared before Congress in 2015. “This
behavior risks destroying science’s reputation for honesty. It is this
objectivity and honesty which gives science a privileged seat at the
table. Without this objectivity and honesty, scientists become regarded
as another lobbyist group.”
Problems behind climate change science are becoming uncovered at an ever-increasing rate.
“Even DC-establishment environmentalists
have worried about a backfire,” Bradley contended. “In 2007, two
mainstream climate scientists warned against the ‘Hollywoodization’ of
their discipline. They complained about ‘a lot of inaccuracies in the
statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data’ –
to which Al Gore (the guilty party) responded: ‘I am trying to
communicate the essence [of global warming] in the lay language that I
understand.’”
Environmental Defense Fund’s Fred Krupp admitted that alarmists need to taper down their volume a few notches.
“There has to be a lot of shrillness taken out of our language,” Krupp voiced in 2011. “In the environmental community, we have to be more humble. We can’t take the attitude that we have all the answers.”
When all is said and done, it is argued
that even though climate change apologetics might not longer be on the
rise, it is here to say … at least for the foreseeable future.
“If the climate problem is exaggerated,
that issue should be demoted,” Bradley concluded. “Enter an unstated
agenda of deindustrialization and a quest for money and power that
otherwise might be beyond reach of the climate campaigners.”
He recalled Sen. Tim Wirth’s (D-Col.) statement when the climate alarm originally sounded a few decades ago.
“We have got to ride the global warming
issue,” Wirth insisted. “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and
environmental policy.”
Bradley commented on Wirth’s call to environmentalists.
“’Right thing’ in terms of economic and
environmental policy?” Bradley sarcastically posed. “That’s a fallacy to
explode on another day.”
Building
infrastructure has been a major task for Chinese engineering during the
past decades. This is the 32.5-kilometre (20.2 mi) Donghai Bridge, connecting mainland Shanghai to the offshore Yangshan Port – one part of the Port of Shanghai, the world's busiest container port.
Science and technology have developed rapidly in China
during the 1990s to 2010s.
The Chinese government has placed emphasis through funding, reform, and
societal status on science and technology as a fundamental part of the
socio-economic development of the country as well as for national
prestige. China has made rapid advances in areas such as education,
infrastructure, high-tech
manufacturing, academic publishing, patents, and commercial
applications and is now in some areas and by some measures a world
leader. China is now increasingly targeting indigenous innovation and
aims to reform remaining weaknesses.
China was a world leader in science and technology until the early years of the Qing Dynasty. Chinese discoveries and Chinese innovations such as papermaking, printing, the compass, and gunpowder (the Four Great Inventions)
contributed to the economic development in Asia and Europe. Chinese
activity started to decrease in the fourteenth century. Unlike in
Europe, scientists did not attempt to reduce observations of nature to
mathematical laws and they did not form a scholarly community with
criticisms and progressive research. There was an increasing
concentration on literature, arts, and public administration while science and technology were seen as trivial or restricted to limited practical applications.[1] The causes of this Great Divergence continue to be debated. One factor is argued to be the imperial examination system which removed the incentives for Chinese intellectuals to learn mathematics or to conduct experimentation.[2]
After being defeated repeatedly by Western nations in the 19th
century, Chinese reformers began promoting modern science and technology
as part of the Self-Strengthening Movement. After the Communist victory in 1949 science and technology research was organized based on the model of the Soviet Union.
It was characterized by a bureaucratic organization led by
non-scientists, research according to the goals of central plans,
separation of research from production, specialized research institutes,
concentration on practical applications, and restrictions on
information flows. Researchers should work as collectives for society
rather than as individuals seeking recognition. Many studied in the
Soviet Union which also transferred technology. The Cultural revolution, which sought to remove perceived "bourgeois"
influences and attitudes, caused large negative effects and
disruptions. Among other measures it saw the scientific community and
formal education attacked, intellectuals were sent to do manual labor,
universities and academic journals were closed, most research ceased,
and for nearly a decade China trained no new scientists and engineers.[1]
After Mao Zedong's death, S&T was established as one of the Four Modernizations in 1976. The new leader Deng Xiaoping, and architect of the Chinese economic reform,
was a strong promoter of S&T and reversed the policies of the
Cultural revolution. The Soviet inspired system was then gradually
reformed. Media began promoting the value of S&T, scientific
thinking, and scientific achievement.[1] The third and fourth generations of leaders came almost exclusively from technical backgrounds.
The State Council of the People's Republic of China
in 1995 issued the "Decision on Accelerating S&T Development" which
described planned Science & Technology development for the coming
decades. It described S&T as the chief productive force and
affecting economic development, social progress, national strength, and
living standards. S&T should become closely associated with market
needs. Not only Soviet style institutes should do research but also
universities and private industries. State institutions should form joint ventures with Chinese or foreign venture capital
in order for S&T developments to reach the industry. S&T
personal should become more occupationally mobile, pay should be linked
to economic results, and age and seniority should become less important
for personal decisions. Intellectual property
rights should be respected. Information exchange should improve and
there should be competition and open bidding on projects. The
environment should be protected. Chinese indigenous S&T in certain
key areas should be especially promoted. Public officials should improve
their understanding of S&T and incorporate S&T in decision
making. Society, including Communist Party youth organizations, labor unions and the mass media, should actively promote respect for knowledge and human talents.[3]
During the last 30 years China concentrated on building physical infrastructure
such as roads and ports. One policy during the last decade has been to
ask for technology transfer in order for foreign companies to gain
access to the Chinese market. China is now increasingly targeting
indigenous innovation.[4]
During this period China has succeeded in developing an innovation
infrastructure, founded on the establishment of over 100 science and
technology parks in many parts of the country, along with encouragement
of entrepreneurship outside the state-owned sector. Yip and McKern
argue that Chinese firms have evolved through three phases as their
innovation capabilities have matured and that by 2017 many of them are
of world standard. They are now strong competitors in the China market
and increasingly in foreign markets, where they are establishing local
operations.[5]
Techno-nationalism
While
the term "techno-nationalism" was originally applied to the United
States in the 1980s, it has since been used to describe nationalistic
technology policies in many countries, particularly in Asia.[6]
Chinese techno-nationalism is rooted in the country's humiliation at
the hands of more advanced countries in the 19th century. Indeed,
China's leaders (like those of other countries) have long seen
scientific and technological development as vital for achieving economic
affluence, national security, and national prestige. Lacking indigenous
technological intellectual property
and innovation are seen as key national problems. The 21st century has
thus seen a series of central government initiatives designed to
promote "indigenous innovation" and technological development more
generally in China. These include the National Medium- and Long-Term
Program for Science and Technology Development (2006–20), the Strategic
Emerging Industries initiative, the Internet Plus initiative, and the
Made in China 2025 Program, among others.
Through these initiatives, the Chinese state has intervened in
the economy in a variety of ways to promote national technological
development and reduce reliance on other countries. Prioritized
industries and firms are protected and guided. There are systematic
efforts to replace foreign technology and intellectual properties with
indigenous technology. Foreign companies are given many incentives for
technology transfer and for moving R&D to China. At the same time
the technological abilities of domestic companies are supported in
various ways. Such policies have generated considerable conflict
between China and developed countries, particularly the United States,
although China has often proven flexible when its policies have been
challenged.[7]
Nationalism
and nationalistic achievements have been seen as becoming the main
ideological justifications and societal glue for the regime as Marxism
loses influence. Some science and technology mega-projects has been
seen as questionable trophy projects done for propaganda purposes with
Chinese state-controlled media being filled with reports of Chinese
achievements.[8][9]
Gross domestic expenditure on research and development
In its Medium and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Science and Technology
(2006–2020), China fixed itself the target of devoting 2.5% of GDP to
research and development by 2020. Between 2003 and 2012, gross domestic
expenditure on research and development (GERD) rose from 1.13% to 1.98%
of GDP, suggesting that the country was on track to meet its target.[10]
The research firm Battelle estimates that China's GERD will exceed that of the United States by 2023.[11]
However, several convergent factors cast doubt over the accuracy of
Battelle's prediction: the deceleration in China's rate of economic
growth in 2014, the considerable drop in industrial production since
2012 and the major stock market slide in mid-2015. After progressing
rapidly for a decade, GERD stabilized at 2.07% of GDP in 2015.[12]
China devoted 5.1% of total research spending to basic research
in 2015, according to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics. This is up
from 4.8%, on average, over the past decade, but less than in 2004
(6.0%). The prolonged policy focus on experimental development has
resulted in enterprises contributing three-quarters of Chinese research
spending (77% of total expenditure on R&D in 2015). Enterprises
focus on experimental development, which accounted for as much as 97% of
their total research expenditure by 2015.[12] Business enterprises contributed 60% of GERD in 2000 and 74% in 2008. In 2004, 74% of GERD went on experimental development.[13] China aims to increase the share of basic research to 15% of total research spending by 2020.[4][10]
Institutions
The State Council of the People's Republic of China
is the top administrative organ in China. Immediately below it are
several ministries and ministry level organisations involved with
various aspects of science and technology.[14]
The State Council Science and Education Leading Group, consisting of
the leaders of the major science bodies, attempts to organize the
national policy. Efficiency of overall coordination has been questioned
with various agencies seen as having overlapping missions and rivalries
for resources and sometimes engaging in wasteful duplication.[15]
The National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Sciences directs planning for social sciences and philosophy.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences
(CAS) is the most prestigious professional science organization in
China with China's scientific elite being members. It directs many
research institutes, research programs, graduate training programs, and
gives influential advice. The Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE) gives important advice but unlike the CAS does not have research institutes of its own.[14] The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) has a similar role to CAS for social sciences and philosophy. There are also many more narrow academies such as the Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences.
The national scientific and academic organizations affiliated to the China Association for Science and Technology are also important forces in scientific and technological research.
Research is carried out by governmental research institutes, in higher learning institutions, and by private enterprises.[15]
Local governments have become increasingly important in R&D
funding and may now contribute up to half of government spending.
Intense rivalry for research and high-tech industry has been argued to
sometimes create wasteful subsidized overcapacity, dispersal of efforts
better centralized in a few localities, and poorly judged bureaucratic
subsidizing of technologies that soon become out-dated.[15][16]
National programmes
As of 2010, China's national R&D programmes encompassed the:[15]
Key Technologies Program (renamed in 2006 as "zhicheng" or Support)
Torch Program - New technology commercialization by creating special hi-tech zones and incubators
Key Laboratories Program
Engineering Research Centers
State Key and New Product Program
Innovation Fund for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
Special Technology Development Project for Research Institutes
Action Plan for Promoting Trade by Science and Technology
National New Products Program
Agricultural S&T Transfer Fund
The major national programs received 15-20% of government R&D
spending in 2010. They funded research, after a stated competitive
proposal procedure, in universities, institutes, and enterprise. Important project may receive funding from several programs. The
programs have arguably had a strong effect but have also been involved
in scandals, corruption and fraud. They have been accused mainly of
producing derivative works rather than driving innovation and it has
been claimed that they ignore merit in selecting projects in favor of cronyism. China is trying to improve their efficiency through measures such as more peer-review and evaluations.[15]
In the first participation of Chinese student in an international student assessment test, the 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment, 15-year-old students from Shanghai
ranked first in all of the three categories: mathematics, science, and
reading. The Chinese students scored particularly well compared to other
nations in mathematics. One explanation for the Chinese results may be a
culture emphasizing education and competitive examinations and more
time spent studying in part due to less participation in activities such
as sports. Teaching have become a higher status occupation. Also,
industrialized Shanghai which has done important educational reforms may
not be representative for the rest of China. While there was no
evidence of cheating or technical problems with the testing, Shanghai
which attracts many immigrants from the rest of China may have allowed
particularly good students to study in the city and the students may
have been told that the test was important for China's image. The OECD director of the testing, Andreas Schleicher,
said that the results were expected to produce astonishment and had
been examined for accuracy by international experts after the OECD
received the Shanghai scores. He also said that the results "refute the
commonly held hypothesis that China just produces rote learning" and
"Large fractions of these students demonstrate their ability to
extrapolate from what they know and apply their knowledge very
creatively in novel situations".[19]
In 2015 four major cities in China were tested resulting in much lower
scores; 531 in mathematics, 518 in science, and 494 in reading.[20]
China has become of the world's biggest sources for research and
development personnel. Between 2000 and 2008, the number of engineers
and scientists more than doubled to 1.59 million. Relative to population
size this is still low compared to major developed nations like the
United States and Japan but the gap is rapidly closing.[13] The number of doctorate awards in science and engineering have increased tenfold since the early 1990s.[21] The number of students in general at universities increased from 1 million to 5.4 million during the 1998-2007 period.[4] In 2009 alone, China produced over 10,000 Ph.D. engineering graduates, and as many as 500,000 BSc graduates in engineering, mathematics, information technology, and computer science – more than any other country.[22]
The C9 League, pitched as China's Ivy League,
is an alliance of nine elite Chinese universities which receive a high
amount of national research funding and produce a large share of
national research output.
Chinese universities contribute an unusually large share of
patents. The universities receive about half of R&D money from
private enterprises.[4]
2.25 million students have studied abroad since 1978. 340,000
were studying abroad in 2011 which was an increase by 20% over the
previous year. In total 818,400 have returned to China with this
occurring in particular in recent years. 186,200 returned to China in
2011 which was an increase by 38% over the previous year. China offers
several benefits for high-achieving foreign educated Chinese who return
to China. Students are now also returning because increased job
opportunities unlike previously when many stayed abroad due lack of jobs
in China.[23]
A 2009 study found that only 10% of Chinese students plan to stay in
the United States due to visa restrictions, fear of lack of job
opportunities, and belief that US growth will lag behind average world
growth rates. 52% believed that the best job opportunities were in China
which was in marked contrast with earlier surveys. 74% felt that the
best days of China's economy was coming. 68% intended to start
businesses.[24]
When they return, foreign educated students often provide crucial
science and technology knowledge, management skills, and innovation
abilities for scientific research and industry. The senior management in
high-tech companies are often foreign educated.[25]
Chinese diaspora
Overseas Chinese, as is the case for other diasporas and their homelands,
have contributed significantly to China's development. They have been
seen as an important channel for bringing trade, investment, and modern
technology to China by both commercial activities and public non-profit
cooperation.[26]
By using 'Brain Gain' to attract highly educated overseas Chinese to
return to China to work, China has made significant improvements in its
innovation ecosystem although there are some limitations to how
sustainable this technique may be.
Industrial espionage
One of the objectives of Chinese intelligence activity abroad is alleged to be industrial espionage as well gaining military technology.
Also private companies have been accused of espionage. Intelligence
agencies suspect that thousands of Western companies may have been
affected by data breaches that can be traced back to China.[27]
International cooperation
The China Internet Information Center
stated in a 2005 article that China had inter-governmental cooperative
S&T agreements with 96 nations, cooperative S&T programs with
152 nations and regions, and participated in more than 1,000
international S&T cooperative organizations. NGO international
exchanges and cooperative activities had increased. The China Association for Science and Technology and related organizations as well as the National Natural Science Foundation of China
participated in many cooperative international organizations. Chinese
researchers held 281 leading posts on international organizations'
expert committees and held 293 executive member-director or higher level
positions.[28]
Technology transfer and R&D by multinational corporations
In
the early 1980s foreign companies began transferring technology by
licensing agreements and sales of equipment. Later in the 1980s many multinational corporations started transferring technology by entering into joint ventures with Chinese companies in order to expand in China. China in the 1990s introduced increasingly sophisticated regulations of foreign investment by which access to the Chinese market was traded for technology transfer. The entry of China into the World Trade Organization
in 2001 required this practice stop but critics argue that it
continues. Chinese critics have argued such technology transfer may be
useful for catching up but does not create new, cutting edge
technologies.[15]
China has increasingly encouraged multinational corporations to
create R&D centers in China. Chinese critics have argued that
foreign owned R&D mainly benefits foreign companies and removes many
talented Chinese researchers from indigenous companies and
institutions. Chinese supporters have argued that the foreign R&D
serves as a role model and encouragement for indigenous companies and
creates skilled communities from which labor and knowledge can easily
flow to indigenous companies. In 2010 there were 1,200 such R&D
centers and 400 out the Fortune 500
corporations had created such R&D centers. Corporations have argued
that this is a necessity in order to adapt products for the local
requirements of the Chinese market as well as it being essential for
maintaining global competitiveness to make use the many available
Chinese engineers and scientists. China is now ranked first when
multinational corporations are asked in which nation future R&D
centers are most likely to be located.[15]
Innovation
A
2005 report found serious shortcomings to China’s national innovation
system. There were problems with services to help turn S&T work into
results and the allocation of national funding to support S&T was
far from optimal. Sometimes researchers became short-sighted if they get
too close to the market. Another serious problem was that companies
facing severe competition looked first to purchase foreign technology
rather than investing in developing technology and technology
development capacity at home in China. Many of the patent applications
came from medium-sized enterprises (70%) since small enterprises invest
little in research.[29]
China's hierarchical, top-down society where authority is greatly
respected and feared has been argued to stifle creative debate.[30]
China in a 2006 report outlined policies for improving
innovation. They include 20 large megaprojects in areas such as
nanotechnology, high-end generic microchips, aircraft, biotechnology,
and new drugs. This is combined with a more bottom-up approach on a Silicon Valley model consisting of small start-ups, venture capital, and cooperation between industry and universities.[31]
It has also been argued that China is the world leader in making
small, innovative improvements to existing designs. One example is
continual improvements to the design of power supplies
making them gradually smaller, less expensive, and more energy
efficient. This may not create completely new products or create
headlines but may be more important for creating employment.[32][33]
A 2016 NBER paper found that the Chinese economy is becoming increasingly innovative.[34]
The study found that rising labor costs in China and "expanded market
opportunities in the world economy" were the main drivers behind
innovations.[34]
The study also found that state-owned firms innovated less than private
firms, even though state-owned firms received far greater subsidies.[34]
Procurement
The
central Chinese government, a large buyer of high-tech products, in
2009 proposed controversial policies demanding that companies selling to
it promote Chinese innovation and that the products sold are free of
foreign intellectual property.[31]
The most controversial parts were later withdrawn but local Chinese
governments continue to use procurement to encourage indigenous
innovation.[15]
Intellectual property
Effective protection of intellectual property
has been seen as weak. There has been an increasing recognition of that
this discourages indigenous innovation and efforts has been made to
strengthen the system.[15]
China has been accused of not protecting foreign intellectual
property and tacitly allowing such technologies to be copied and claimed
to be Chinese intellectual property.[31]
Patents
In 2011, China became the nation with the greatest number of filed patent
applications. However, this reflects in part that the government gives
companies incentives for filing patent applications regardless of if
eventually granted. The percentage of patents applications in China
filed by Chinese companies rose from less than 52% in 2006 to nearly 73%
in 2010. World Intellectual Property Organization
data shows that Chinese companies have also become more important
regarding patents overseas with Chinese companies now being on place two
and four regarding number of patent applications filed by individual
companies. China aims to transform the economy from "Made in China" to
"Designed in China" and from contract manufacturing to having brand name companies with resulting improved profit margins.[35]
China lags behind the United States for several patent
indicators. In 2013, US residents filed 287 831 patents, almost the same
number as non-residents (283 781). In China, on the other hand, just
17% of patents were filed by non-residents and there were as many as 704
936 resident applications to the Chinese State Intellectual Property
Office. This compares with 21% of patent applications involving
non-residents in Japan. In addition, although China is catching up fast,
it still trails the USA, Japan and the European Union for the number of
patents in force. China counted 1 851 triadic patents in the USPTO database in 2012, compared to 15 391 for Japan,13 978 for the European Union and 13 785 for the United States.[36]
Among patents filed with the Chinese State Intellectual Property
Office in 2013, just under half (64 153) of those filed by non-residents
(120 200) were granted. This compares with one in five for residents.[10]
China's global share of triadic patents rose from 0.5% to 3.6%
between 2002 and 2012. Over the same period, the Republic of Korea
almost doubled its own world share to 5.5% (up from 2.8%). In 2012,
Japan, the European Union and the United States continued to dominate
global patents, accounting for 29.6%, 26.9% and 26.5% respectively. This
means that the Big Five accounted for 92% of the triadic patents in the
world in 2012.[37]
Standards
To encourage innovation and avoid foreign intellectual property China has been developing indigenous technical standards. One example is the TD-SCDMA3G
standard. Critics have seen it as costly and delaying 3G introduction
while supporters argue that it has increased technical abilities and
experience which has increased Chinese competitiveness regarding 4G.[15]Long-Term Evolution Time-Division Duplex is being implemented as China's indigenous 4G standard.
Academic publishing
The Royal Society in a 2011 report on academic publishing
stated that in share of English scientific research papers the United
States was first followed by China, the UK, Germany, Japan, France, and
Canada. The report predicted that China would overtake the United States
some time before 2020, possibly as early as 2013. China's scientific
impact, as measured by other scientists citing the published papers the
next year, is smaller although also increasing.[38] An analysis of ISI Web of Knowledge
data found that China had increased its share of the most highly cited
science articles from 1.85% in 2001 to 11.3% in 2011. By 2014 China
could surpass Germany and the UK and be ranked second after the United
States. The share of the United States declined from 64.3% to 50.7%
during the same ten-year period.[39]
A 2009 study of Chinese social science studies in the Social Sciences Citation Index
found a slow increase until 1999. The 1999-2007 period saw a very rapid
increase. However, in 2007 China still only contributed 1.39% of the
studies and mainland China only surpassed Hong Kong in 2006. Economics
& business had larger share than social, political &
communication science and psychology. The low share of social sciences
compared to natural sciences may reflect that this is a common pattern
in Asian nations, that Chinese social scientists publish in national
journals not included in the Index and have less career incitements
regarding publishing in international journals, and that state ideology
and control is more important for social sciences than natural sciences.
In China natural sciences are administered by the Ministry of Science and Technology
while social sciences are administered by the National Planning Office
of Philosophy and Social Sciences which may hinder inter-disciplinary
collaboration.[40]
Articles published in China related to basic medial science and clinical research and indexed by PubMed increased on average by 31.2% and 22% each year between 2000 and 2009. Randomized clinical trial
were about 1/3 of clinical research articles. However, in 2009 this
still represented only 1.5% of worldwide clinical research articles and
1.7% of worldwide randomized clinical trials. Clinical research
education for medical students and the involvement and the supporting
environment for medical doctors regarding clinical research have
shortcomings.[41]
Science-Metrix, a Canadian data-analysis company, predicted that in 2010 China would publish as many natural sciences and engineering peer-reviewed
papers as the United States. In 2015 China is predicted to publish as
many papers as the US across all fields. In 2030 China is predicted to
surpass the US in life and social sciences.[42]
There are 8,000 journals and 4,600 in scientific fields. Almost
all Chinese science organisations publish their own journal. The
government owns or supports most journals with only a small number being
privately owned. The "publish or perish" system has been argued to contribute to many low quality journals and articles that are infrequently cited and also to plagiarism
and fraud. The Chinese government has put into place stricter
regulations, punished or terminated some journals, and aims increase
quality control and peer evaluation of journals as well as to create
five to ten large publishing groups.[43] As part of the reforms, in 2012 the China Association for Science and Technology,
which oversees 1,050 journals, in a declaration listed various forms of
misconduct, plagiarism, and fraud and as well, the penalties for
perpetrating them such as written warnings, blacklisting, contacting the
researcher's home institution or funding agencies, or public
disclosure. It has also been seen as important by increasing pressure on
other journals and by informing editors who may not know that some
actions such as favoring researchers based on personal relations are
unacceptable. China also plans to give substantial financial incentives
to top journals based on factors such as their Chinese and international
impact factor.
It has been questioned if this will have an effect on the many poor
quality journals who in return for money help researchers fill their
institutional requirements for published papers.[44]
State-owned enterprises
Chinese state-owned enterprises
are owned by a variety of actors such as local governments and
governmental agencies. They may benefit from advantages not available
for smaller, more innovative firms which have been seen as problematic.
In 2010 state owned enterprises won many biddings for renewable energy
projects since they did not have worry about paying off investments for
several decades and could ignore risks and costs. The owners may attempt
to protect their enterprises from competition by regulations or
otherwise use their influence in an unfair manner which may stifle more
innovative, private competitors. Private enterprises surpassed stated
owned enterprises during the 2002-2007 period regarding rapidity of
increase of research spending, patent applications, and R&D
laboratories. The number of research scientists and engineers increased
rapidly in private enterprises while they declined in state owned
enterprises.[15]
Corruption
Concerned about corruption in Chinese science,[45] some Chinese scientists, including Professor Liu Ming 刘明 of Zhejiang University in his 2005 book Critique of the Academic Evaluation System 学术评价制度批判, argue that interference from government officials and university bureaucrats makes peer review
far less effective in China than it could be. The time scientists spend
cultivating politically influential people is lost to scientific
research. Liu argues that the command economy mentality of measuring
everything by the numbers combined with pervasive political interference
results in a great waste of money, human talent as well as considerable
corruption in Chinese science.[46]
A 2008 investigation into a certification for high-tech enterprises
allowing large tax breaks and other advantages found that more than 70%
of the enterprises had gained this under questionable circumstances and
an investigation of a sample found that 73% did not pass the
requirements.[15]
Awards
The State Science and Technology Prizes, including the State Preeminent Science and Technology Award,
are the highest honor in People's Republic of China in science and
technology, in order to recognize citizens and organizations who have
made remarkable contributions to scientific and technological progress,
and to promote the development of science and technology.
Specific areas of R&D
Value in dollars of high-tech exports by country in 2009. The value of Chinese high-tech exports was more than twice that of any other nation.
The 13th Five-Year Plan for the National Economy and Social Development
(2016–2020) will initiate the key Scientific and Technological
Innovation 2030 Project in the following key areas: aero-engines and gas
turbines; a deep sea station; quantum communication and quantum
computers; brain sciences and brain research. The project also
encompasses nine other sub-projects, including an innovative
seed industry, smart grid, space-terrestrial information network, intelligent manufacturing and robots.[47]
Agriculture
There is a lack of arable land and water which means only new technology can increase the output of Chinese agriculture. Former President Jiang Zemin's has therefore called for a "new revolution in agricultural science and technology."[48] Restrictions and regulations concerning genetically modified foods have been introduced or proposed after widespread public concern.[49]
China has been buying millions of foreign breeder animal as well as
large amount of foreign semen and livestock embryos in order to rapidly
improve the genetics of Chinese livestock.[50] More advanced agricultural methods such as increasing use of pesticides has contributed to concerns regarding the Food safety in China.
In 2008 the fishing industry in China accounted for 34% of the global output. Aquaculture in China had more than twice the output of capture fishing and contributed 62.3% of the global aquaculture output.[51] The rapid growth of aquaculture is in part due to Chinese research such as regarding the artificial breeding of carps.[52][53]
Chemistry, materials science and nanotechnology
A 2012 study found that China's share of academic papers in the field of nanotechnology
had increased from less than 10% in 2000 to nearly a quarter in 2009
and had overtaken the United States for first position. However, China
was less influential in the top three journals and regarding citations,
suggesting a lesser quality.[54] A study by Statnano.com
confirmed the rankings in terms of volume, with China producing 59,198
articles in nanotechnology in 2017, compared to 25,281 for the United
States.[55]
In terms of the density of publication, however, the United States
remained ahead, with 68.76 articles on nanotechnology per million
inhabitants, compared to 25.44 per million for China in 2014.[10]
China was in second place for the number of patents granted. A number
of bodies have been created to establish national standards and ensure
oversight.[54]
According to the Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of
China, which is affiliated with the Ministry of Science and Technology,
China contributed about one-quarter of all academic articles published
around the world in materials science and chemistry and 17% of those
published in physics between 2004 and 2014 but just 8.7% of those in
molecular biology and genetics. This nevertheless represents a steep
rise from just 1.4% of the world share of publications in molecular
biology and genetics over 1999–2003.[10][12]
KPMG in 2010 predicted that the Chinese chemical industry will become world's largest producer by 2015. The Chinese government aims to make China self-sufficient regarding petrochemicals and plastics
with the exception of the raw feedstock of oil and gas. The Chinese
industry is increasing R&D in order to create higher value products
using more advanced technology.[56] Another development
In 2009 China manufactured 48.3% of the world's televisions, 49.9% of
mobile phones, 60.9% of personal computers and 75% of LCD monitors.
Indigenously made electronic components have become an important source
of recent growth.
Artificial intelligence
On 8 July 2017, the Chinese State Council announced plans to turn China into the world leader in artificial intelligence (AI) by 2030, seeking to make the industry worth 1 trillion yuan.[58] The State Council published a three-step road map
to that effect in which it outlined how it expects AI to be developed
and deployed across a wide number of industries and sectors, such as in
areas from the military to city planning.[58]
According to the road map, China plans to catch up to current AI world
leaders' technoloogical abilities by 2020, make major breakthroughs by
2025 and be the world leader in 2030.[59][60]Drones and robotics
China is the leader in drone
technology, it is the first country in the world to create large scale
transport drones, as well as the first to produce an amphibious drone.
Chinese drone companies such as DJI and Ehang (Beijing Yi-Hang Creation Science & Technology)
conquered majority of the civilian drone industry, with DJI alone
dominating 85% of the global market share. Ehang also created the
world's first flying taxi drone, Ehang 184, an eco-friendly low altitude autonomous aerial vehicle capable of providing transportation and medium distance communication.[61][62][63][64][65]
In some regions, such as the Pearl River Delta,
manufacturers have problems with labor shortages, raising wages, and
higher expectations regarding work from more highly educated young
people. This has increased the demand for industrial robots. As of 2017, China is the largest user and producer of robotics technology, as well as the first country in the world to perform an automateddental implant.
It is the largest and fastest-growing robotics market in the world, and
plans to manufacture at least 100,000 industrial robots annually by
2020.[66][67][68]
Software industry
The
Chinese software industry in 2010 had a higher than 15% share of the
world's software and information service market and had been growing by
an average 36% each year during the previous decade. Chinese IT
companies have been moving away from narrow downstream services and
products to having a full range. China, with the active support of the
Chinese government, is a leading pioneer in Internet of Things technology.[69]
According to the China Internet Network Information Center there were 751 million internet
users as of 2017, with 53.2% of the population being internet users.
The number of mobile internet users reached 724 million, with high
penetration rates for mobile phones and broadband internet.[70][71] By 2017, China has the largest e-commerce
market in the world, worth US$1.132 trillion, with a significant lead
on other markets and almost tripling US market, the second largest.[72]
In 2017, there were more than 1.36 billion mobile subscribers in China, with the number of fixed line subscriptions hitting 310 million. The number of 4G users increased significantly, hitting 932 million by August 2017.[73][74][75] By 2020, China plans to adopt 5G network nationwide. State-owned China Telecom
has already deployed 5G-oriented C-RAN fronthaul network, unveiling
that it will be conducting commercial trials of 5G technology in 2019
and carry out network field trials in six Chinese cities in the latest
sign of China's determination to lead the global deployment of the
next-generation mobile technology.[76][77][78]
Microprocessors
China
has its own versions of microprocessors, manufactured and developed
domestically, which are also used to build the world's most powerful
supercomputers.
Supercomputing in China has expanded rapidly. Supercomputing affects the possibility to do cutting-edge research in many areas such as design of pharmaceuticals, cryptanalysis, natural resource exploration, climate models, and military technology. As of 2017, China had 202 of the 500 greatest supercomputers
in the world, far exceeding any other country (including the US which
has 143), in addition to possessing the top 2 most powerful
supercomputers.[79][80] China is developing the capacity to manufacture the components domestically and plans to be the first to build an exascale supercomputer.
China may also be planning to create much more powerful large-scale
distributed supercomputing by connecting its supercomputer centers
together.[81]Tianhe-1 was for a period in 2010-2011 the world's fastest supercomputer.[82] In June 2013, Tianhe-2, the successor to Tianhe-1, took the crown from its predecessor. In 2016, China's new supercomputer, Sunway TaihuLight
became the world's most powerful supercomputer, significantly
surpassing Tianhe-2's capabilities by three folds, while using
Chinese-made chips. This signals China's success not only in the
supercomputing industry, but also its domestic chip-making technology.[83][84]
Semiconductors
China's semiconductor industry
has despite extensive governmental support had many problems in areas
such as innovative new designs. This may be due to factors such as
poorly guided state and local government support for soon outdated
technologies and geographically scattered efforts, lacking engineering
education, and poor protection of intellectual property. This may change
by factors such a new emphasis on market mechanisms rather than direct
support, concentration of efforts, return of Chinese who have studied
abroad, increased pressure on foreign companies to transfer technology,
indigenous Chinese technological standards, and increased demands for
indigenous technology in the local market.[16][85][86]
The country has rapidly progressed in the semiconductor industry, while backing its largest chip maker and developer, Tsinghua Unigroup,
with a US$150 billion funding to secure China's dominance in the
semiconductor technology, and build a world-class semiconductor industry
over the next 5 years.[87][88][89]
Energy
As China rapidly industrializes, power consumption and power generation are also increasing as well as research on these issues.
The Chinese animation industry and access to the latest technology, such as 3Dcomputer-generated imagery
technology, is actively supported by the Chinese government and
included in the latest national planning. In part this may be because of
a desire to increase Chinese soft power. The same technology as in Hollywood is available and much postproduction
is outsourced to China. Successful indigenous artistic creativity is
seen as a problem and may be restricted by factors such as production
being aimed at getting government patronage rather than public approval,
censorship, and some story lines based on Chinese culture not appealing
to foreign audiences.[97]DreamWorks Animation,
in a joint venture with Chinese companies, will set up a studio in
Shanghai that may eventually get bigger than DreamWorks HQ, in part to
avoid to quota restrictions on foreign films with China within a decade
having been predicted to become the world's biggest cinema and
entertainment market.[98][99]Disney has also entered into a partnership in order to help develop the Chinese animation industry.[100]
The China Research Institute of Film Science & Technology and the China Film Group Corporation developed and in 2012 put into commercial use the DMAXmotion picturefilm format as well as associated technologies. It has been described as a competitor to IMAX
and as laying the foundation for Chinese film projection technology
using indigenous Chinese technology and intellectual property.[101]
Environment-friendly technologies
Rapid industrialization has been accompanied by many environmental problems and rising pollution in China.
One part of the Chinese response involves advanced technology such as
the world's largest high-speed rail network and high fuel efficiency
requirements for vehicles.[102] China is rapidly expanding its wastewater treatment systems and power plant emission reduction systems.[103][104] Due to the Chinese water crisis, as well as for future exports, China is building up its desalination technological abilities and plans to create an indigenous industry. Some cities have introduced extensive water conservation and recycling programmes and technologies.[105]
Health
Biotechnology and genetics
Monitor Group in a 2010 report predicted that China within a decade will become the world leader in discovery and innovation in life sciences.
Some research is seen as less controversial in China than elsewhere
such as research regarding the genetic causes of intelligence. BGI, formerly Beijing Genomics Institute, has been described as having the world's largest DNA sequencing facilities.[81]
Stem cell research and stem cell treatments are less controversial in Chinese culture which have supported Chinese research as well medical tourism
to China in order to receive experimental and often unproven therapies.
In 2012 a regulatory crackdown was instituted which may increase the
ability of the Chinese industry to get approval for sales of future
therapies to other nations.[106][107] More generally, China aims and has made progress towards becoming a world leader in regenerative medicine which also includes areas such as tissue engineering and gene therapy.[108]
China in 2011 stated that biotechnology (including biopharmacy, biological engineering,
bio-agriculture and biomanufacturing) was a major priority for science
and technology spending. Biotechnology will be used to enhance economic
development as well as for improving Chinese environmental protection,
nutrition, healthcare, and medicine. The Chinese governments expects
biotechnology to add 1 million jobs during the 2011-2015 period.[109]
Brain research
On 22 March 2018, an agreement was signed establishing the Chinese Institute for Brain Science, Beijing.[110]
The launch of this institute may represent a significant departure from
the current policy focus on applied research and development. [12]
Once completed, the new brain institute will serve as a core
facility for the country’s planned project to study the human brain. The
institute will not be part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Rather,
it will collaborate with the academy, along with Beijing’s other leading
biomedical institutions, including Tsinghua University, Peking
University and the Academy of Military Medical Sciences.[12]
The new institute will probably receive funding both from the
National Natural Science Foundation and from the mega-science programmes
within the Scientific and Technological Innovation 2030 Project. In
March 2018, the government announced plans to place the National Natural
Science Foundation under the Ministry of Science and Technology but the
implications of this latest reorganization of science are unclear, as
the two agencies have different missions in support of basic research.[12]
Merrill Lynch predicted in 2011 that China would become the world's second largest pharmaceutical market in 2013 and the largest in 2020.[111] The chief executive of Hoffmann-La Roche
in 2012 stated a few years ago many Chinese life sciences scientists
had to leave China but that many were now returning to conditions often
better than in the West regarding laboratories, funding, and political
support for the industry.[112]Counterfeit drugs
have caused a number of scandals as well as being a problem for drug
development and authorities have increased regulations and enforcement.[113][114]
A 2011 report by PwC stated that a decade earlier China barely had any presence in the medical technology industry but its abilities had been rapidly growing. China could well become more important than Europe by 2020.[115]
Machine tools
Development of advanced machine tools, such as computer numerical control
machine tools, are seen as a priority and supported by the Chinese
government. China is the world's leading producer and consumer of
machine tools.[116]
A 2010 US government report stated that US export controls of advanced
five axis machine tools were ineffectual due to the technical
capabilities of Chinese and Taiwanese manufacturers.[117]
15-28% of governmental R&D expenditures may go to military
research according to some unofficial estimates. The Chinese defense
sector remains almost completely state-owned but military equipment
production has been reorganized into corporate bodies allowing limited
competition and the defense patent system has been reformed to allow
greater rewards to innovative enterprises and individuals. The
organizational structure has shed civilian applications while at the
same time cooperation with the civilian sector has increased and state
supported civilian research sometimes have dual use applications.[15] Chinese jet engines
remains a problematic area that has caused concern at the highest
levels with China still being largely dependent on imports from foreign
manufacturers. One possible explanation is a continued Soviet style
fragmentation of the research and production line into many isolated
units having little contact with one another causing problems with
overall standardization, integration, and quality control. More problems
from this may be duplication of efforts, dispersal of efforts, and
unproductive competition over patronage causing problems such as
dishonest reporting of problems. High precision jet engines may be
particularly sensitive to accumulated quality problems.[124]
History of China's hydrogen bomb
China successfully tested a hydrogen bomb
on June 17, 1967 at Lop Nur Nuclear Weapon Test Base, in Malan,
Xinjiang (also known as "Test No. 6"). China became the fourth country
to have successfully developed a thermonuclear weapon after the United States, Soviet Union and the United Kingdom. The device was dropped from a Hong-6 (Chinese manufactured Tu-16) and was parachute-retarded for an airburst at 2960 meters. The bomb was a three-stage device with a boosted U-235 primary and U-238 pusher. The yield was 3.3 megatons.
It was a fully functional, full-scale, three-stage hydrogen bomb,
tested 32 months after China had made its first fission device. China
thus produced the shortest fission-to-fusion development known in
history. China had received extensive technical help from the Soviet
Union to jump-start their nuclear program, but by 1960, the rift between
the Soviet Union and China had become so great that the Soviet Union
ceased all assistance to China.[1]
Thus, the Number 6 test was indeed an independent endeavor, after the
induced military and economic sanctions enacted by the superpowers at
the time, the United States and the Soviet Union.
China's H-bomb was different from the traditional Teller-Ulam configuration.
As an advantage, it was completed without the calculations needed from
supercomputers, which would consume a lot of time. To shrink the size of
the weapon, the reflectors were made parabolic with the solid fusion
fuel located at the foci. It is also known as Yu Min Design (or Yu-Deng
Design) as Yu Min made major contributions included the solutions to a
series of fundamental and critical theoretical problems of nuclear
weapons, which led to breakthrough of the unique hydrogen bomb.
The goal of China was to produce a thermonuclear device of at
least a megaton in yield that could be dropped by an aircraft or carried
by a ballistic missile. Several explosions to test thermonuclear weapon
designs, characteristics and yield boosting preceded the thermonuclear
test.[1]
Advisory firm The Beijing Axis director Lilian Luca in 2010 stated that China was becoming a world leader in mining technology.
Technological solutions were initially concentrated on achieving
massive low-cost production but increasing emphasis has been placed on
environmental and safety issues in part reflecting greater concern in China with environmental issues. China was already a world leader in certain areas such as rare earth elements.[125]
China has imposed export quotas on rare earth elements, 95% of which
are mined in China, citing environmental issues, but has been accused of
wanting to force high-tech industry using rare earth elements to move
to China.
Finding rare earth elements is only the first and some argue the easiest step. Other steps towards manufacturing such as refining
is controlled by China and Japan with the previously dominant United
States having lost all of its producers and much of its fundamental
technological ability with the number of scientists and engineers in the
area declining dramatically.[126]
China plans to launch 5 commercial satellites for foreign
customers in 2012 and aims to capture 15% of the commercial launch
market and 10% of the satellite export market by 2015. In 2011 China
launched a total of 19 rockets, which was the second most after Russia.[133]
China
in 2012 produced more than one-third of the developed world's apparel
import but the share has been decreasing in recent years as
low-technology and labor-intensive production has been moving to regions
like Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe.[136][137]
The state owned Comacaerospace manufacturer aims to reduce Chinese dependency on foreign companies for large passenger aircraft.[139] The future C919 aims to be completely made in China.[140]
Motor vehicles
The automotive industry in China is the world's largest producer of motor vehicles.[141] However, China's indigenous car companies have had difficulties on the global market and the growing electric vehicle
market has been seen as way to remedy this. China in 2010 proposed
controversial legislation requiring foreign electric vehicle producers
to form minority joint-ventures and share technologies with Chinese carmakers in order to get market access.[142] A 2011 report financed by the World Bank stated that China was becoming the world leader on electric vehicles.[143]
Shipbuilding
In 2009-2010 China become the world's largest shipbuilder but South Korea
regained the top position in 2011 in part due to more advanced
technology. China is developing its technological abilities and
competition is expected to increase.[144][145]
The BBC wrote in a 2011 article on high-speed rail in China that China in 2005 had no high-speed railways.
In 2010 it had more than Europe and in 2012 China was expected to have
more than the rest of the world combined. China demanded that foreign
companies wanting to participate had to share their technology. Some
10,000 Chinese engineers and academics then in three years produced a
faster Chinese high-speed train that China is now exporting it to other
nations.
