【社会人文】饶毅、施一公《中国科学国际地位远不如体育: 借鉴和挑战》
这个帖子发布于 16 年零 263 天前，其中的信息可能已发生改变或有所发展。
Time to turn attention to science & technology
By Rao Yi and Shi Yigong [The authors Rao Yi and Shi Yigong are professors respectively with Peking University and Tsinghua University. The article is reprinted from Global Times.]
In the 29th Olympics in Beijing, China outnumbered the United States by snatching more than 10 percent of the total gold medals. That could serve as a persuasive testimony that the country has pushed itself to the list of the world's top sports powers. Compared with its marvelous sports performance, China, however, has achieved far less recognition in science. It has never won a Nobel Prize, a top prize gauging one's contribution to the world in a certain realm, still far behind Britain, Germany and Japan, not to mention the US.
Over the past years, China has made great headway both in sports and science. In its first participation in the 1932 Olympics in Los Angeles, the country dispatched a six-member delegation, with only one athlete to compete. 52 years later in the 23rd Olympics in the same city, China's athletes bagged a total of 15 gold medals, marking the country's gradual advancement to the circle of athletics powers. In the 2004 Athens Olympics China was second only to the US in the gold table, and it has a overwhelming superiority to other countries in gold medal in this year's Beijing Olympics, which further consolidated the country's status in the world's sports.
In the realm of science, China, however, has not established an international status proportionate with its comprehensive national strength. At many international academic conferences or in many influential international academic magazines, our Chinese scholars have had only a very limited influence.
In the world's 20th congress of genetics convened in Berlin in July, for instance, none of the 12 keynote speakers were from China, and only two Chinese participants were invited to deliver speeches, 1.2 percent of the total 168 speakers. Also in the world-renowned magazine The Cell, no Chinese scholar published an article from 1981 to 2004.
Like sports, boosting science also needs substantial policy support. In recent years, the government has increased financial input in science and technology, but their smooth development will continue to be hindered by bottlenecks if no improvements are made in the problematic fund-distribution mechanism.
The belief is still deeply rooted in the minds of many people that distribution of the funds on scientific research is used as a tool to balance the interests of different groups, but not as one to boost scientific development and technological invention. To change the long-prevailing mindset, relevant authorities should get the point that the money should flow to the groups of people who can really contribute to the country's scientific advancement. Now it is difficult to imagine that our athletic sports could have achieved such prominent progress if the country's funds invested in sports were not used to cultivate excellent sportsmen.
Science and sports, by nature, have a common goal and standard. That is both aim to reach the world's top level under internationally recognized standards. China's sports have held on to exactly this model, thus resulting in its rapid development in recent years.
In science, on the other hand, a different development mode has been adopted and the domestic criteria are used to replace international ones. A particular example is that the appointments to the title of "academicians", a top title both in honor and economic treatment, which is awarded to people not completely in accordance with their contribution to the world's frontier sciences.
Another distinct difference between sports and science is that the level of the former cannot be raised indefinitely, thus leaving space for less developed countries to catch with up advanced ones. But this is not applicable to science. With scientific and technological advancement happening almost on daily basis, a slow progress made by a country also means its regression in this field compared with other ones. A country underdeveloped in science could catch up with developed ones through utmost persistence and long-term accumulation.
In sports people can only make slow improvement when they reach a certain level, and even come to a standstill for a long time, given that even specially trained athletes cannot surpass the physical limits. Science is totally different with the world's science and technology leaping forward every day. People even cannot predict the boundary of scientific and technological progress.
Now that China is in a period of steady economic development, we should not let slip the historical chances for scientific development. Instead we should lay out a reasonable program for scientific, technological and educational development in order to advance the country's science forward in as short a period of time as possible.
We should work harder to develop into a scientific and technological world power through improving our financial input, talents cultivation and research mechanism. With added scientific research funds, we should absorb more talents and promote its system reform just like what we have done in the sports field.
Over the past three decades, China has cultivated a solid base for scientific and technological talents worldwide. But some of them, because of mastering internationally applicable know-how, have chosen to stay overseas. Thus, we should encourage those with an aspiration to serve the motherland to return, and at the same time, create a favorable environment for domestic scientific and technological personnel to play their part.
In pursuing the reform of the scientific research and development system, we should set up a department that is independent of group interests and can coordinate and monitor the country's overall scientific development.
To raise the country's scientific status in the international society will not only boost national confidence, but also produce an inestimable role in the country's social development. All these can serve as a necessary groundwork for the resurrection of the Chinese nation.
The authors are professors respectively with Peking University and Tsinghua University. The article is reprinted from Global Times
饶毅、施一公《中国科学国际地位远不如体育: 借鉴和挑战》
我国在北京奥运会上已获10%以上的金牌，和美国在同一个数量级，而我国科学远低于世界科学最重要成就的10%。虽然用诺贝尔奖衡量科学比较单一，但它能从一个方面反映国家科学发达程度。我国的科学诺贝尔奖尚未实现零的突破，不仅未及美国，离英国、德国、日本、瑞典尚有相当距离。
科教兴国是国策，体育强国是国家实力表现的一个方面。奥运显示中国体育已经迈进了世界前列，而看科学事业，尽管有相当大的发展，中国仍只是科技和教育事业的大国，远非世界强国。在为北京奥运欢欣鼓舞的时刻，思考中国体育事业和科技教育事业的异同，可以使我们保持清醒的头脑：在为中国人民百年奋斗的成果而骄傲的同时，必须清楚我们在很多方面还有很大差距。
中国体育和科学的国际地位
百余年来，中国体育和科学都经历了从无到有的飞跃，取得了巨大进步。中国体育在世界上举足轻重，而我国科学尚未取得与大国相称的成就和国际地位。今天的奥运如果没有中国参加，会大为逊色；而如果中国不参加众多国际学术会议、不在重要杂志发表论文，对世界科学的影响相当有限，有些学科甚至没有影响。
中国人曾被讥称为"东亚病夫"，体育水平非常落后。1932年第一次参加美国洛杉矶第十届奥运会时，代表团仅6人，参赛仅短跑选手刘长春。1936年的柏林奥运会，只有69名运动员参赛。中国大陆选手虽然在1952年参加过芬兰赫尔辛基第十五届奥运会，但全面参加是1984年在洛杉矶的第二十三届奥运会，并赢得了历史上第一枚奥运金牌。从此，中国逐渐迈向体育强国。2004年第二十八届雅典奥运会上，中国以32枚金牌仅次于美国。北京奥运会，更创金牌第一。
中国参加重要国际科学大会情况如何？以今年7月刚在德国柏林召开的第二十届国际遗传学大会为例。这个自1899年以来历史悠久的大会，今年3000多人参加。12位大会主题发言有6位诺贝尔奖得主，其余6位水平相近，但没有一个来自中国。在168位大会应邀发言者中，中国只有2人，占大会的1.2%。通过论文摘要评选胜出的112位发言人，中国有2位占1.8%。在国际顶尖学术期刊发表的科学论文比例也反映了国际地位。国际知名的《细胞》杂志上，我国1981－2004年空白，近年仍不到1%。我国做出主要科学突破占国际比例也很低。以上是一个侧面的比较，如果具体分析我国的科学发现，会得出同样的结论，那就是，尽管我国做出过一些国际水平的工作，但总体亟待改善。
科学界可以向体育界借鉴的思路、目标和标准
发展科学和体育都需要国家的大力支持。近年科技经费大幅增加，但如果没有相应大力改进分配体制，则我国科学的进步可能出现瓶颈，科学经费不能最有效地利用，为国家和科学发展留下隐患。
我国科学经费分配有问题的思想根源，也许是不少层面将科学经费分配首先看成是利益的分配，而不是为了刺激科学发现、技术发明。科研经费的分配是利益当先，而不是事业当先。要扭转这个思想，国家和科技教育界必须清楚，中国仍然是创业国家，中国科学界不是利益分配集团，而是需要为国家出力、为世界做贡献的创业集体。如果中国将体育经费都用来分配利益，而不首先考虑培养优秀运动员、取得优异成绩，很难设想中国的竞技体育能取得今天的成绩。同理也能解释中国男子足球队面临的尴尬局面，中超联赛利益的分配和巨大的经济收入，也许减弱了运动员在国际赛场上竞技的动力。
科学和体育都有目标和标准。我国体育瞄准世界目标多年，得到世界前列的个人和团体才能得到国内肯定。科学的目标是重要发现，标准同样是世界性的，但我国科学界常以国内标准代替国际标准。以院士评选来肯定对我国有贡献、有成就的科技界人士，初衷非常好，但也带来众所周知的问题。用体育来比喻，就是以国内裁判员评分作为运动员待遇最重要的标准，在中国得前几名就可以给运动员带来终身荣誉，参与国家、地方相关重大决策，掌握重要资源。如果科学界的问题发生在体育界，难以想象我国体育能走向世界。院士如何待遇合适、科技奖惩制度如何改善，既肯定以往成绩、又避免我国科学家停留在国内标准和荣誉而不向国际一流迈进，是我国科技教育事业急需解决的重要问题之一。
科学的挑战：在国情允许时有改革的紧迫感
科学技术与竞技体育有很大的区别。体育水平不可能无限提高，所以给后进赶上先进留下较多时间。科技日新月异，进步慢就是相对退步，赶上科技先进的国家很困难，需要极大的毅力和长期有效的积累。
竞技体育的世界最高水平提高缓慢甚至停滞不前，因为运动员无法逾越人类生物学的运动极限。例如，美国运动员鲍勃?比蒙于1968年在第19届奥运会上创造的8.90米的跳远世界纪录，直到1991才由另一位美国运动员迈克·鲍威尔以8.95米的成绩打破，并保持至今。
而科学技术的世界最高水平提高极为迅速，人类尚不能预计科学的极限。有科技沉淀作为强大基础的国家，并不会停下来等我们。科学没有第二，技术上的第一也常使第二没有市场。因此，追赶科学技术的世界最高水平，远难于赶超竞技体育的世界最高水平。
在中国有经济实力的稳定时期，不能错过历史时机，应该有紧迫感，妥善布局科技、教育，立志在三十年内极大地提升科学水平。将我国从科技大国建成世界科技强国有三个前提：科研经费的投入、人才的培养和使用、科研体制的改进。经费、人才、体制，三位一体，同步协调改革，缺一不可。在经费增加的情况下，我们需要吸引人才和改革体制。改革开放三十年来我国在世界范围内逐步拥有较为雄厚的科技人才基础。他们中的一批人才因为具有国际通用的杰出才能，滞留海外。我们可以吸引有理想者回国。我们也要使国内不同层次的科研人员更多的发挥作用。体制改革在国家层面上需要有一个脱离部门利益、为国家整体科学发展着想的机制提供总体思路、设计、协调和监督。
本文开篇用了诺贝尔奖来从一个侧面说明我国科学任务艰巨。但需要声明，我们不认为应该用提高体育的方式来专门攻诺贝尔奖。我们提倡，我国应该在科学全面发展基础上，在实质进展的过程中，自然产生许多诺贝尔奖的工作，使它成为我国科学发展的附带产物，而我国科学的提高带来的对人类和中国发展的贡献，则是我国应该努力的目标。
提高我国科学的国际地位，不仅会提高国家和民族的自信，而且必将对我国经济、社会发展发挥不可估量的作用，是中华民族伟大复兴的必要基础。
（作者是北京大学饶毅教授、清华大学施一公教授。）
By Rao Yi and Shi Yigong [The authors Rao Yi and Shi Yigong are professors respectively with Peking University and Tsinghua University. The article is reprinted from Global Times.]
In the 29th Olympics in Beijing, China outnumbered the United States by snatching more than 10 percent of the total gold medals. That could serve as a persuasive testimony that the country has pushed itself to the list of the world's top sports powers. Compared with its marvelous sports performance, China, however, has achieved far less recognition in science. It has never won a Nobel Prize, a top prize gauging one's contribution to the world in a certain realm, still far behind Britain, Germany and Japan, not to mention the US.
Over the past years, China has made great headway both in sports and science. In its first participation in the 1932 Olympics in Los Angeles, the country dispatched a six-member delegation, with only one athlete to compete. 52 years later in the 23rd Olympics in the same city, China's athletes bagged a total of 15 gold medals, marking the country's gradual advancement to the circle of athletics powers. In the 2004 Athens Olympics China was second only to the US in the gold table, and it has a overwhelming superiority to other countries in gold medal in this year's Beijing Olympics, which further consolidated the country's status in the world's sports.
In the realm of science, China, however, has not established an international status proportionate with its comprehensive national strength. At many international academic conferences or in many influential international academic magazines, our Chinese scholars have had only a very limited influence.
In the world's 20th congress of genetics convened in Berlin in July, for instance, none of the 12 keynote speakers were from China, and only two Chinese participants were invited to deliver speeches, 1.2 percent of the total 168 speakers. Also in the world-renowned magazine The Cell, no Chinese scholar published an article from 1981 to 2004.
Like sports, boosting science also needs substantial policy support. In recent years, the government has increased financial input in science and technology, but their smooth development will continue to be hindered by bottlenecks if no improvements are made in the problematic fund-distribution mechanism.
The belief is still deeply rooted in the minds of many people that distribution of the funds on scientific research is used as a tool to balance the interests of different groups, but not as one to boost scientific development and technological invention. To change the long-prevailing mindset, relevant authorities should get the point that the money should flow to the groups of people who can really contribute to the country's scientific advancement. Now it is difficult to imagine that our athletic sports could have achieved such prominent progress if the country's funds invested in sports were not used to cultivate excellent sportsmen.
Science and sports, by nature, have a common goal and standard. That is both aim to reach the world's top level under internationally recognized standards. China's sports have held on to exactly this model, thus resulting in its rapid development in recent years.
In science, on the other hand, a different development mode has been adopted and the domestic criteria are used to replace international ones. A particular example is that the appointments to the title of "academicians", a top title both in honor and economic treatment, which is awarded to people not completely in accordance with their contribution to the world's frontier sciences.
Another distinct difference between sports and science is that the level of the former cannot be raised indefinitely, thus leaving space for less developed countries to catch with up advanced ones. But this is not applicable to science. With scientific and technological advancement happening almost on daily basis, a slow progress made by a country also means its regression in this field compared with other ones. A country underdeveloped in science could catch up with developed ones through utmost persistence and long-term accumulation.
In sports people can only make slow improvement when they reach a certain level, and even come to a standstill for a long time, given that even specially trained athletes cannot surpass the physical limits. Science is totally different with the world's science and technology leaping forward every day. People even cannot predict the boundary of scientific and technological progress.
Now that China is in a period of steady economic development, we should not let slip the historical chances for scientific development. Instead we should lay out a reasonable program for scientific, technological and educational development in order to advance the country's science forward in as short a period of time as possible.
We should work harder to develop into a scientific and technological world power through improving our financial input, talents cultivation and research mechanism. With added scientific research funds, we should absorb more talents and promote its system reform just like what we have done in the sports field.
Over the past three decades, China has cultivated a solid base for scientific and technological talents worldwide. But some of them, because of mastering internationally applicable know-how, have chosen to stay overseas. Thus, we should encourage those with an aspiration to serve the motherland to return, and at the same time, create a favorable environment for domestic scientific and technological personnel to play their part.
In pursuing the reform of the scientific research and development system, we should set up a department that is independent of group interests and can coordinate and monitor the country's overall scientific development.
To raise the country's scientific status in the international society will not only boost national confidence, but also produce an inestimable role in the country's social development. All these can serve as a necessary groundwork for the resurrection of the Chinese nation.
The authors are professors respectively with Peking University and Tsinghua University. The article is reprinted from Global Times
饶毅、施一公《中国科学国际地位远不如体育: 借鉴和挑战》
我国在北京奥运会上已获10%以上的金牌，和美国在同一个数量级，而我国科学远低于世界科学最重要成就的10%。虽然用诺贝尔奖衡量科学比较单一，但它能从一个方面反映国家科学发达程度。我国的科学诺贝尔奖尚未实现零的突破，不仅未及美国，离英国、德国、日本、瑞典尚有相当距离。
科教兴国是国策，体育强国是国家实力表现的一个方面。奥运显示中国体育已经迈进了世界前列，而看科学事业，尽管有相当大的发展，中国仍只是科技和教育事业的大国，远非世界强国。在为北京奥运欢欣鼓舞的时刻，思考中国体育事业和科技教育事业的异同，可以使我们保持清醒的头脑：在为中国人民百年奋斗的成果而骄傲的同时，必须清楚我们在很多方面还有很大差距。
中国体育和科学的国际地位
百余年来，中国体育和科学都经历了从无到有的飞跃，取得了巨大进步。中国体育在世界上举足轻重，而我国科学尚未取得与大国相称的成就和国际地位。今天的奥运如果没有中国参加，会大为逊色；而如果中国不参加众多国际学术会议、不在重要杂志发表论文，对世界科学的影响相当有限，有些学科甚至没有影响。
中国人曾被讥称为"东亚病夫"，体育水平非常落后。1932年第一次参加美国洛杉矶第十届奥运会时，代表团仅6人，参赛仅短跑选手刘长春。1936年的柏林奥运会，只有69名运动员参赛。中国大陆选手虽然在1952年参加过芬兰赫尔辛基第十五届奥运会，但全面参加是1984年在洛杉矶的第二十三届奥运会，并赢得了历史上第一枚奥运金牌。从此，中国逐渐迈向体育强国。2004年第二十八届雅典奥运会上，中国以32枚金牌仅次于美国。北京奥运会，更创金牌第一。
中国参加重要国际科学大会情况如何？以今年7月刚在德国柏林召开的第二十届国际遗传学大会为例。这个自1899年以来历史悠久的大会，今年3000多人参加。12位大会主题发言有6位诺贝尔奖得主，其余6位水平相近，但没有一个来自中国。在168位大会应邀发言者中，中国只有2人，占大会的1.2%。通过论文摘要评选胜出的112位发言人，中国有2位占1.8%。在国际顶尖学术期刊发表的科学论文比例也反映了国际地位。国际知名的《细胞》杂志上，我国1981－2004年空白，近年仍不到1%。我国做出主要科学突破占国际比例也很低。以上是一个侧面的比较，如果具体分析我国的科学发现，会得出同样的结论，那就是，尽管我国做出过一些国际水平的工作，但总体亟待改善。
科学界可以向体育界借鉴的思路、目标和标准
发展科学和体育都需要国家的大力支持。近年科技经费大幅增加，但如果没有相应大力改进分配体制，则我国科学的进步可能出现瓶颈，科学经费不能最有效地利用，为国家和科学发展留下隐患。
我国科学经费分配有问题的思想根源，也许是不少层面将科学经费分配首先看成是利益的分配，而不是为了刺激科学发现、技术发明。科研经费的分配是利益当先，而不是事业当先。要扭转这个思想，国家和科技教育界必须清楚，中国仍然是创业国家，中国科学界不是利益分配集团，而是需要为国家出力、为世界做贡献的创业集体。如果中国将体育经费都用来分配利益，而不首先考虑培养优秀运动员、取得优异成绩，很难设想中国的竞技体育能取得今天的成绩。同理也能解释中国男子足球队面临的尴尬局面，中超联赛利益的分配和巨大的经济收入，也许减弱了运动员在国际赛场上竞技的动力。
科学和体育都有目标和标准。我国体育瞄准世界目标多年，得到世界前列的个人和团体才能得到国内肯定。科学的目标是重要发现，标准同样是世界性的，但我国科学界常以国内标准代替国际标准。以院士评选来肯定对我国有贡献、有成就的科技界人士，初衷非常好，但也带来众所周知的问题。用体育来比喻，就是以国内裁判员评分作为运动员待遇最重要的标准，在中国得前几名就可以给运动员带来终身荣誉，参与国家、地方相关重大决策，掌握重要资源。如果科学界的问题发生在体育界，难以想象我国体育能走向世界。院士如何待遇合适、科技奖惩制度如何改善，既肯定以往成绩、又避免我国科学家停留在国内标准和荣誉而不向国际一流迈进，是我国科技教育事业急需解决的重要问题之一。
科学的挑战：在国情允许时有改革的紧迫感
科学技术与竞技体育有很大的区别。体育水平不可能无限提高，所以给后进赶上先进留下较多时间。科技日新月异，进步慢就是相对退步，赶上科技先进的国家很困难，需要极大的毅力和长期有效的积累。
竞技体育的世界最高水平提高缓慢甚至停滞不前，因为运动员无法逾越人类生物学的运动极限。例如，美国运动员鲍勃?比蒙于1968年在第19届奥运会上创造的8.90米的跳远世界纪录，直到1991才由另一位美国运动员迈克·鲍威尔以8.95米的成绩打破，并保持至今。
而科学技术的世界最高水平提高极为迅速，人类尚不能预计科学的极限。有科技沉淀作为强大基础的国家，并不会停下来等我们。科学没有第二，技术上的第一也常使第二没有市场。因此，追赶科学技术的世界最高水平，远难于赶超竞技体育的世界最高水平。
在中国有经济实力的稳定时期，不能错过历史时机，应该有紧迫感，妥善布局科技、教育，立志在三十年内极大地提升科学水平。将我国从科技大国建成世界科技强国有三个前提：科研经费的投入、人才的培养和使用、科研体制的改进。经费、人才、体制，三位一体，同步协调改革，缺一不可。在经费增加的情况下，我们需要吸引人才和改革体制。改革开放三十年来我国在世界范围内逐步拥有较为雄厚的科技人才基础。他们中的一批人才因为具有国际通用的杰出才能，滞留海外。我们可以吸引有理想者回国。我们也要使国内不同层次的科研人员更多的发挥作用。体制改革在国家层面上需要有一个脱离部门利益、为国家整体科学发展着想的机制提供总体思路、设计、协调和监督。
本文开篇用了诺贝尔奖来从一个侧面说明我国科学任务艰巨。但需要声明，我们不认为应该用提高体育的方式来专门攻诺贝尔奖。我们提倡，我国应该在科学全面发展基础上，在实质进展的过程中，自然产生许多诺贝尔奖的工作，使它成为我国科学发展的附带产物，而我国科学的提高带来的对人类和中国发展的贡献，则是我国应该努力的目标。
提高我国科学的国际地位，不仅会提高国家和民族的自信，而且必将对我国经济、社会发展发挥不可估量的作用，是中华民族伟大复兴的必要基础。
（作者是北京大学饶毅教授、清华大学施一公教授。）
