西方應將科學家派往中國

Sixty years ago, Francis Crick and James Watson announced their discovery of the structure of DNA. The academics themselves were an international pair: one was American, the other British. Back then, both needed to be in Cambridge to work together. Things had changed little in the 250 years since Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz argued about calculus. Today, however, duos such as Crick and Watson can work in different countries because technology has slashed the cost of collaborating among research leaders.

60年前，弗朗西斯·克里克(Francis Crick)和詹姆斯·沃森(James Watson)宣佈，他們發現了脫氧核糖核酸(DNA)的結構。這兩位學者是一對國際合作夥伴：一個是英國人，另一個是美國人。當時，這種合作是建立在兩人都身在劍橋大學(Cambridge University)的基礎上。自艾薩克·牛頓(Isaac Newton)和戈特弗裏德·萊布尼茨(Gottfried Leibniz)討論微積分以來的250年裏，這種情況基本上沒有什麼變化。但如今，像克里克和沃森這樣的合作伙伴可身在不同的國家工作，因爲科技的發展大大降低了研究帶頭人之間的合作成本。

The UK, and Cambridge university, provide evidence of this change. Since 1981, the number of journal articles produced by UK researchers has risen 150 per cent, to about 100,000 articles a year. But when you look at domestic papers, where all of the authors were in Britain, output is almost flat. According to the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database of 12,000 journals, since 2010 the majority of journal articles with a British-based author has had at least one co-author from another country.

英國和劍橋大學爲這種改變提供了證據。1981年以來，英國研究人員發表的期刊論文數量增長了150%，達到每年10萬篇左右。不過，如果你考察的是英國本土論文（即論文的作者全都住在英國），那麼發表數量幾乎沒有變化。根據收錄有1.2萬份期刊的湯森路透科學網(Thomson Reuters Web of Science)數據庫，自2010年以來，英國作者發表的期刊論文絕大多數都至少有一位來自其他國家的共同作者。

This is not a solely UK phenomenon. Research shows the same trend in the US, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland. Academics may reside in one country, but they belong to a community that has no boundaries. Their output is international. This has particularly affected cutting-edge research teams. We can measure the importance of research by counting how many times articles are subsequently cited by other researchers. The average citation impact of UK research is well above the world average. However, an article produced by a mixture of UK-based and foreign researchers can expect to be cited more than half as many times again compared with a wholly UK research team.

並非只有英國存在這種現象。研究表明，美國、德國、法國、荷蘭和瑞士也出現了同樣的趨勢。學者們可能住在不同的國家，但他們卻屬於一個無國界的團體。他們的論文是國際合作的成果。這對最前沿研究團隊的影響尤爲明顯。我們可以通過統計論文被引用的次數來衡量研究成果的重要性。英國論文的平均引用次數遠高於世界平均水平。但不出意料的是，英國研究人員與外國研究人員合作發表的論文的平均引用次數，要比英國本土論文的平均引用次數多出一半以上。

A network of elite institutions is emerging beyond national boundaries that is almost independent of their hinterlands. Cambridge’s top international partners are all leaders themselves: the Max Planck Institute, Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Caltech, Berkeley, Toronto, Heidelberg and Tokyo.

一個由精英研究機構組成的網絡正在超越國界的限制，它幾乎獨立於這些機構的所在國存在。劍橋的頂級國際合作夥伴們自身也都是一流研究機構：馬克斯·普朗克研究所(Max Planck Institute)、哈佛大學(Harvard)、麻省理工學院(MIT)、加州理工學院(Caltech)、加州大學伯克利分校(Berkeley)、多倫多大學(University of Toronto)、海德堡大學(Heidelberg)和東京大學(The University of Tokyo)。

Indeed, more than half of Cambridge’s research is joint with global partners. Its output is already high-impact, but it gets a citation boost from collaborative work. In the UK, the disparity in impact between domestic and international research is growing. Universities with few international partners are behind.

實際上，劍橋大學一半以上的研究是與其國際夥伴合作完成的。劍橋發表的論文本已具有很大的影響力，國際合作論文進一步推高了劍橋論文的引用次數。在英國，本土論文和國際合作論文的影響力差距越來越大。沒有國際合作夥伴的大學落在了後面。

Outside Europe and North America, however, the pattern is different. Since 1981, domestic research has at least trebled among the Bric nations. Growth was astronomic in China, where research by teams there has grown tenfold since 1997 and is now 30 per cent greater than the UK’s output. “Homegrown” research is also expanding rapidly in emerging research powers such as Brazil, India, South Korea and eastern Europe.

然而，在歐洲和北美以外地區，情況則有所不同。自1981年以來，金磚四國(BRIC)的本土論文數量至少增長了兩倍。中國論文數量的增長可謂“天文數字”——中國研究團隊的論文數量自1997年以來增長了9倍，目前的數字比英國高出30%。巴西、印度、韓國和東歐國家等新興論文大國的“本土”論文數量也在迅速增長。

This transformation is creating a massive global research industry that is causing some big problems for national science policy makers in advanced economies. First, reading the published output of academics from these more closed academic communities will not give our researchers access to their culture, priority setting and problem solving. So the research superpowers must start expanding partnerships between their own institutions and leading ones in the emerging research nations. Stop worrying about brain drains: the west needs to start sending scientists to work in these countries.

這種轉變催生出一個龐大的全球研究產業，爲發達經濟體的國家科學政策制定者帶來了一些重大問題。首先，我們的研究人員無法通過閱讀這些較爲封閉的學術團體發表的論文，來了解他們的文化、優先事項制定以及問題解決機制。因此，論文超級大國必須着手擴大本國研究機構與新興論文國家主要研究機構的合作。別再擔心人才流失：西方有必要派出科學家到這些新興國家工作。

Furthermore, it will be tougher for governments in the west to capture future returns on investment in research. Future innovation and developments are increasingly likely to have owners in several countries. It will not be possible to generate, corral and contain the innovative knowledge within one country, so governments need to be training and retaining the people who know how to use these discoveries.

此外，西方國家的政府未來將更加難以從研發投資中收穫回報。未來的創新和開發越來越有可能歸多個國家的研究人員所有。單獨一個國家不可能創造、圈護和控制創新知識，因此，各國政府需要培養和留住那些懂得如何運用這些發現的人才。

The primary reason for investing in the research base is to support great research. What they produce pays off in unpredictable ways, often with huge social and economic benefits. In the short term, a research base that spawned both Newton and Crick produces people who can drive innovation in business. But the challenge of weaving research into economic success is no longer just about getting the best brains into labs in your own country.

投資研究基地的主要原因是要爲重大研究提供支持。研究成果的影響是不可預知的，往往會帶來巨大的社會和經濟效益。短期而言，培養出牛頓和克里克二人的研究基地會培養出能夠推動商業創新的人才。但要想把研究成果轉化爲經濟成果，面臨的挑戰將不再只是把最優秀的人才招攬至本國實驗室。

The writer is director of research at Thomson Reuters IP and Science

本文作者是湯森路透知識產權與科技(Thomson Reuters IP and Science)研究主管