China's academic pay-off wall
China’s academic market is in turbulence. But is a ‘China century’ in global academia on the horizon?
Last month, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, one of China’s biggest and most important research institutes, shook the community when it announced it was terminating its subscription to China’s largest journal database, CNKI. This is the latest in a wave of cancellations for the database, with other high-level institutions such as Peking University, Nanjing Normal University, and Wuhan University of Technology all suspending access due to “exorbitant increases in subscription prices.”
The Chinese government’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) has now launched an antitrust investigation into CNKI, which stores some 95% of Chinese academic papers and resources as well as many foreign articles and abstracts, and charging some universities CNY10 million (US$1.6 million) for the privilege of accessing them.
“Sorry, why do we care about academic journal database legislation?” you ask with a groan. Partly because it’s a reflection of the CCP’s general anti-monopoly moves that we’ve discussed more recently, but also because it’s yet another blight on China’s academic score-card. China’s academic market is stifled by predatory practices, as well as restrictive policies and the limited world-view of the CCP. Apart from expensive journals, stagnant wages, degree inflation, and conspiratorial accusations surrounding investigations into Covid-19 are just some of the problems that are currently plaguing the Chinese academic industry.
Despite the bad news, however, there are still some who predict predicting that China will rise up as the academic powerhouse of the next century. It’s certainly got the numbers - China produced around 4 million graduates in 2020, over 1 million of whom graduated in STEM subjects. It also controls major research and innovation hubs such as Shenzhen, as well as reputable institutions in Hong Kong. It has influence in developing countries, and is becoming increasingly important for publishers in developed countries.
So is Chinese academia thriving, or are the CCP’s policies hobbling any chance of greatness? Let’s compare the problems facing China’s universities and research institutions to the possibilities the sector still holds.
Problems
The case of CNKI is not unique. Academic publishers and databases are known for their exorbitant fees, putting increasing pressure on university libraries and research institutions, forcing them to make tough decisions about what resources to cut. These decisions ultimately impact the quality and amount of research that academics and scientists can conduct, limiting the amount of progress that can be made. Of course, in the case of a domestic database, the Chinese government can step in and manipulate things, breaking up CNKI’s monopoly and forcing them to reduce their fees. But unfortunately, this is not the only problem facing China’s academic sphere.
The biggest problem at the moment is probably the suspicion surrounding research in China, especially when it comes to collaborating with other countries. A recent DW investigation showed that European researchers may have contributed to the improvement of China’s military through their collaboration with China’s elite National University of Defense Technology, which is run by the Chinese military. This includes collaborating on the almost 3,000 publications on hypersonic and nuclear weapons, AI, and supercomputers.
“In some studies, such as one on tracking groups of people, the application was immediately clear. One would ‘have to make a real effort not to see the dual-use applications here — you can't rule out that it can be used to track Uyghurs’.”
Another problem highlighted was the number of students who came from China to study in elite higher education institutions in the West, only to go back and join the NDT or Military Commission after graduation. Even before the pandemic, pieces were being written on the imbalanced nature of China’s relationship with the rest of the world. China is seen to be benefitting from sending many students abroad, while limiting the amount of knowledge it shares with other countries. Both the US and EU have threatened to cut off such relationships.
The government also seems to be tightening restrictions on research and the actions of scholars. In March, several scholars were prevented from attending a virtual conference hosted by the Association of Asian studies. Their universities emailed them to cancel their presentations and withdraw their papers, and one scholar was even visited by the police and questioned for hours because the title of their paper was deemed “incorrect”. It’s not always clear why these bans happen either. In this case, no one was speaking about Xinjiang, Tibet, or Hong Kong. One scholar stated that "Topics that have seemingly been considered nonpolitical are now being yanked or deemed not permissible to be exchanging with international colleagues.”
This adds to the considerable stress that many Chinese researchers already feel. In fact, they’re so stressed that they’re all apparently dying off young due to poor physical and mental health. Long working hours and the competition to produce more results is also leading to a lack of innovation and more plagiarism. This is not helped by the stagnation of wages and perceived lack of promotion opportunities.
Chinese scholars are worried about the impact these problems will have on the careers of young scholars, as well as the collaboration between Chinese academics and the rest of the world. China risks losing out on key developments in advancing fields, as well as the simple exchange of knowledge, which could lead to greater cultural understanding and acceptance - something China could use a bit more of.
However, some of these problems are partly mitigated by some of the opportunities posed by China’s unique position in the market. And the fact that academia and research is a market in the first place.
Advantages
I work for a major academic publisher (I won’t say which one), and I was recently pretty much told upfront that knowing things about China would be a major advantage for my career. Without revealing any details, China is one of the biggest sectors in academic publishing, and one that publishers are actively looking to expand into. China produces the most research papers, and though there are problems, quantity is often more important than quality in the field. The things that are holding them back (language, style issues, and plagiarism) are easily surmountable.
The number of Chinese publications in international journals is only increasing, driven by Chinese scientists' desire to have a higher international impact and collaborate with researchers abroad. Despite calls that reform is needed so that Chinese academics can publish more of their research in domestic journals in Chinese, this pressure to publish (and publish in world-renowned journals) doesn’t seem to be going away any time soon. This is good news for international publishers, who see the potential market in China as a serious money-maker.
Researchers from developed countries are also increasingly wanting to work with China, where investment in science and technology research is a top priority. As we can see from the example of NDT above, this may be a cause for concern for national security, but it’s a great boost for Chinese R&D. It is clear that China is laser focused on investing more into tech (comms, health, industry, AI…), both on the mainland and in Hong Kong. This means that science education is a booming market in China, one that will garner more investment and produce more economic growth, driving a skills upgrade in China that will probably see it surpass every other nation in its computing and manufacturing capabilities.
While some feel that increasing pressure on a single industry is problematic as it can create a race-to-the-bottom attitude, China sees this competition as healthy and vital to economic development. They encourage schools to “close the loop between academic education and on-the-job requirements” to create a new kind of “purple-collar” worker, super employees “ that meet the requirements of intelligent manufacturing, are familiar with the actual manufacturing process, understand the corresponding technical theories, and have both hands-on operational and managerial capabilities.”
These employees represent the China of the future - one where every worker is an efficient, highly educated, money-making machine, and national rejuvenation has been achieved with no reliance on the outside world necessary.
No pain, no gain
All these issues stem from the fact that higher education, technology, and research have become market-based systems. Their relationship to capitalism, GDP growth, and national development is so intrinsic that it can be argued that ‘pure academia’ no longer exists. China has arguably gone from “no art for art's sake” to “no academia for curiosity’s sake”.
I mentioned earlier that China had produced over 1m STEM graduates in 2020 alone. On the other hand, there were fewer than 3,000 philosophy graduates. It is clear that science and technology are being valued much higher than Humanities and Social Sciences, which is often natural for a country trying to make the transition from ‘developing’ to ‘developed’. The same criticisms that the West applies to countries that depend on coal for their own growth can be seen echoed here. China would argue that they should be allowed to ‘get rich first’.
But it’s clear that there is an element of humanity missing from CCP policies. Restricting the communications of scholars with their international peers and focusing only on STEM will lead to long-term damage to relationships with other countries, limiting exchange and weakening ties with developed nations, and reducing relationships with developing nations to mere transactions. In the end, it won’t matter how advanced China is if it doesn’t have anyone to share its greatness with.
Of course, as we’ve discussed many times before, perhaps this is China’s master plan. Perhaps academia, research, and education in general are just a means to an end - the end being the restoration of China to its former glory. In that case, the ‘China century’ in academia is squeezed and folded into the ‘China Century’ of everything else, with research and researchers alike reduced to mere tools of the state.
Sources
Baijiahao, 科研人读不起论文,咋整?[Academics can’t afford to read papers, what should they do?]
China Daily, Institutional breakthroughs needed in 'Shenzhen-HK Loop'
China Daily, Scientists recount US wrongly targeting them for ties to China
China Daily, 'One country, two systems' key to HK
China Daily, Joint education valuable in Sino-US cooperation: Envoy
China Biotechnology Network, Nature调查:6%中国科研人年薪超50万元![Nature survey: 6%of Chinese researchers have an annual salary of over 500,000 yuan!]
China Youth, 多名中青年科学家英年早逝,如何为科研人解压松绑 [A number of young and middle-aged scientists died young, how to untie the pressure for researchers]
DW, Are European academics helping China's military?
Foreign Policy, In Hong Kong, a Once Liberal University Feels Beijing’s Weight
NetEase, 中科院90名科研人员集体辞职,当初他们为什么没有出国? [90 researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences resigned collectively. Why didn't they go abroad in the first place?]
NPR, China tightens restrictions and bars scholars from international conferences
Times Higher Education, China’s promised research reform ‘little more than PR exercise’