Sample Speeches

China's Emerging Technological Trajectory
by Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson
President , Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Lally School of Management and Technology Conference
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy , New York

Saturday, September 6, 2003

A further question concerns the role of university (as opposed to research institute) research. China now has more than 1,000 institutions of higher learning - many more than existed in China 30, or even 20 years ago. As they are proliferating, universities are no longer funded exclusively by the government. Some universities have dealt with funding problems by developing spin-off enterprises. That suggests a potential for conflict similar to that cited in the case of the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) institutions.

The number of students in science-related disciplines in China more than doubled, to 3.3 million, between 1995 and 2000. Increases in the number of students, attending relatively new institutions, have resulted in demand for improved university management systems. The government is working to avoid duplicative specializations, to reform curricula, and to broaden the educational base.

As these reforms occur, many U.S. colleges and universities have undertaken joint programs with universities in China . This movement raises a broader question involving the proper role of the international science community in China 's overall S&T development, on and off university campuses.

In my own field of nuclear physics, for example, concern about the uses to which China would put knowledge acquired in this field led to a long delay in sharing the technology to develop a nuclear power generation program. That was finally resolved in 1998, with an agreement on technology sharing, in accordance with our laws on the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) requirements. Since that time, China has ordered seven reactors from foreign suppliers, and hopes to order four more by 2005, and to have about 16 units in operation by 2020. The next Chinese orders may be advanced design reactors that operate more safely than existing units in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world.

The Chinese nuclear program has an additional benefit in terms of mitigating environmental quality issues. The prospect of global warming has led some developed countries to express concern that rapid industrialization in China and India might greatly increase the emission of greenhouse gases, since both countries possess large reserves of coal. Groups in the U.S. , such as the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), argue that the more nuclear energy China employs, the less coal it will have to burn.

Chinese officials have cited environmental concerns as a reason for their desire to expand nuclear energy's contribution to electric generation. In fact, the Chinese have recently begun to show interest in environmental science itself, perhaps realizing that a degraded environment is a heavy price to pay for economic advancement. The ecosystem, and related environmental sciences, were a focus of interest in a meeting of the U.S.-PRC Joint Commission on Scientific and Technological Cooperation last year in Beijing .

That joint commission, chaired by China 's Minister of Science and Technology and the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology, is one of a number of efforts by science policymakers in the two countries to find common ground.

The Chinese and U.S. governments have agreed to cooperate in energy and the physical sciences, on nanotechnologies, nuclear fusion, plasma physics, genomics, catalysis, quantum computation and controls, photonics, and treatment of nuclear waste.

A number of scientific, academic, and science policy organizations also are holding periodic conferences.

The U.S. National Science Foundation has an ongoing dialogue with its Chinese counterpart, the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China, on subjects such as science policy, and biotechnology and biomedicine.

The expressed aim of a 1999 joint conference, entitled R&D and the Knowledge-Based Society was, "the assumption that a deeper understanding and appreciation of differing perspectives and approaches to associated issues will improve planning - nationally, bilaterally, and regionally - for the effective and balanced development of science and engineering resources and their utilization in the service of cultural, social and economic goals."

That statement expresses the reasons for cooperation - and also for science - in the service of cultural, social, and economic goals.

It also acknowledges that China may have differing perspectives on science and technology, which must be appreciated and understood on both sides. This issue comes up in various ways. For example, just as we once mistrusted China 's motives for seeking nuclear technology, so might China 's stem cell and genomic research now be met with concern that China may go into areas such as cloning. The recent news of Chinese use of cloning techniques to create hybrid embryos containing a mix of DNA from humans and rabbits made headlines.

The Chinese researchers explained that they were hopeful the work would yield a new and plentiful source of embryonic stems cells for research and eventual medical use, and many U.S. scientists expressed support. The work also passed the criteria of Chinese ethics authorities, who demanded that the embryos not be allowed to grow more than 14 days.

This is the kind of approach many Western scientists appreciate.

To minimize misunderstanding, it behooves the world scientific community to take China into full partnership, for China 's benefit, and for ours. However, in doing so, we must exercise leadership in finding common ground and in nurturing China 's enormous potential for discovery and innovation. China should exercise similar leadership in demonstrating sensitivity to global norms - and in making a commitment to the employment of science and technology to benefit its citizens and the global community.

China is attempting to accomplish an unimaginably large task with astonishing speed, and science and technology can be the agents that bring success to this effort. But because science and technology have become global endeavors, the Chinese cannot do it alone. It will take leadership, cooperation, and a degree of trust, from all sides. Building trust based on knowledge and understanding is what conferences such as this one help to foster. As I close, let me leave you with a few summary thoughts.

The change taking place in China is very great. The possibilities are equally great. Having the change occur in ways which obviously benefit China, but also advance its role as a responsible world leader requires enabling mechanisms which China might employ and which the world science and technology community might help with. They include:

1. To foster innovation: Investment in fundamental R&D and graduate education - by the government through mechanisms such as the NSFC (National Natural Sciences Foundation of China) and by the private sector - more than is being done today.

2. To exploit innovation: Technology transfer mechanisms

• Licensing of IP
• Bayh-Doyle type mechanisms which allow and foster translation of university-based, government-sponsored research into the market place, but in a way which does not pollute the educational mission of the university.

3. Adherence to international norms

• WTO policies
• Especially IP protection polices

4. A balance between foreign direct investment and home-grown entrepreneurship.

5. Efficient and transparent capital markets.

Now, both of these latter two points are important because, even in the industrialized world, experience has shown that smaller, start-up enterprises are as capable, and, in general, are more capable of innovation than many larger, more cumbersome, overly regulated enterprises, especially in the most advanced, knowledge-based sectors. Their creation and growth requires access to capital. As suggested in a recent article in Foreign Policy Magazine (July/August issue) by Professor Yasheng Huang of MIT, and Professor Tarun Khanna of Harvard Business School , a contrast of the Chinese vs. the Indian approach to economic development might be instructive in this regard. The authors argue that, macroeconomically, China is clearly ahead, but on a micro-economic level. India 's reliance on organic growth may be more sustainable in the long-term.

We will see, but, clearly, there will be lessons gleaned from the evolution and development of both countries.

As I have frequently said, if the world is to achieve peace for all nations, and plenty for all peoples, it will be scientific and technological developments, and their intelligent and sensible deployment, that will enable these achievements. A scientifically productive China will be much more able to achieve those ends for its people, and to play a role in bringing the benefits of peace and plenty to the rest of the world.

Thank you for your attention.