Deutsche Welle, October 8: "German media: Why China has long been excluded from the Nobel Prizes in science. The Austrian newspaper Der Standard commented that so far, only one Chinese scientist has won a Nobel Prize, but in the field of scientific research, China is now replacing the United States as the dominant power."
Ten years ago, Chinese scientist Tu Youyou won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, and this 94-year-old pharmacologist is also the only Chinese scientist to have ever received a Nobel Prize in the sciences.
In 2024, mainland China published nearly 900,000 scientific papers, ranking first among G20 countries. The United States ranked second with about 500,000. This is the first time since 1945 that the United States, which had long dominated the field of scientific research, has been surpassed. In comparison, in 2015, the year when Tu Youyou won the Nobel Prize, China's number of papers was only 300,000, while the United States had the same number as now, 500,000.
The reason why China is currently not winning the Nobel Prize is easy to explain: it often takes several decades for a breakthrough in research to be recognized by the Nobel Prize. The Nobel Prize more reflects past research conditions rather than current ones.
Data shows that the verification period for Nobel Science Prize achievements has significantly lengthened. More than half of the physics prizes awarded after 1985 and nearly half of the chemistry prizes required over 20 years before being awarded. Tu Youyou's artemisinin research began in the 1960s, and she received the Nobel Prize in 2015, which is a typical example of this lag. Since the 1970s, systematic academic research in China has gradually begun, and large-scale investment in scientific research has only recently exploded, and it has not yet entered the "evaluation window" for the Nobel Prize. This explanation aligns with the Nobel Prize's selection criteria.
Regardless, behind the numerical advantage of nearly 900,000 papers published by China in 2024, there is a weakness in basic research — the proportion of basic research funding is only 6.91%, far lower than the United States' 15%. And the Nobel Prize specifically rewards original breakthroughs in basic research. At the same time, the internal citation rate of top Chinese papers exceeds 60%, while in the United States it is only 29%, reflecting that the international academic influence of the results still needs to be improved. This is not entirely explained by a simple "time lag".
The fact that China's number of papers has exceeded that of the United States marks that its research system has already gained global scale advantages, but this is a different dimension of evaluation standards from the production of "Nobel-level achievements." The absence of a Nobel Prize is the result of the combined effect of "insufficient historical accumulation + Nobel Prize lag + weakness in basic research," not due to a single factor. Whether or not China can achieve a breakthrough in the Nobel Prize selection in the future depends on whether it can continue to increase investment in basic research and optimize the evaluation system to encourage innovation, rather than simply pursuing quantitative growth.
Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1845433724345412/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.