Chapter 9 Bureaucracy is not conducive to technological progress

"Science and technology are the primary productive forces" is a well-known saying among Chinese people.What is the key to technological progress in today's society?What are the problems in China's scientific research system? ◎Reporter: How do you evaluate China's current technological status in the world? Chen Zhiwu: I went to elementary school, middle school, and university in China, and I came to the United States in 1986.This special experience allowed me to have my own perspective on this issue: the four great inventions that we have been familiar with since childhood already belonged to the Song Dynasty. In the past 1,000 years, how much further contribution has China, which accounts for 1/5 of the world's population, made?To measure China's contribution to world civilization and China's technological status, the easiest way is to judge from daily life, think about the things you use, see, and touch from getting up in the morning to falling asleep at night , who invented it?How many of them were invented by us Chinese?In fact, we can see that automobiles, trains, telephones, computers, elevators, electric furnaces, airplanes and other things that are closely related to daily life are the result of the Western Industrial Revolution and were invented by others.

◎Reporter: Before the 15th century, China was an undisputed technological power in the world, but since then, this dominant position has passed to the West.Since modern times, China has contributed so little to the world in science and technology. What are the constraints? Chen Zhiwu: This is also a question that many people and I have been discussing.To study why China's contribution is so small, it is better to look at why the West's achievements are so great.The Industrial Revolution began in the 18th century, but in the 15th and 16th centuries, there were such outstanding scientists as Galileo.In the earlier 15th century, western navigators had begun to travel around the world.That is, since then, the technological status of China and the West has reversed.Why it all started in the 15th century I think there are several reasons:

First, whether there is academic freedom, whether people's thinking is restricted, and how much room for individual talents to display. These institutional mechanisms are crucial to the development of science and technology.The Renaissance, which originated in the 14th and 15th centuries, gradually liberated the Western European city-states from the shackles of autocracy, kingship, and religion, and people had the freedom of creation and freedom of thought.The Renaissance is not only the revival of culture and art, but also the emancipation of the mind, which provides the necessary institutional space for the development of science and technology.The Renaissance did not fundamentally change people's primitive abilities. The key is that the guarantee of freedom in the system provides the necessary environment for innovation and enables people to develop their abilities better.

Second, the property rights system in the West has benefited individuals and companies who create inventions. The constitutional system established after the Glorious Revolution in England in 1688 restricted the royal power from arbitrarily infringing on private property. The principles of judicial independence and the sanctity of private property established in other Western countries during the same period were all brought about by the Industrial Revolution that began in 1780. It provides a key basis for the further requirements of the system of property rights protection.Afterwards, the United States and the United Kingdom issued a series of laws on private property, patents, and intellectual property rights.With the reliable protection of private enterprises and intellectual property rights, people will obviously be more willing to make the greatest investment in scientific and technological innovation. This incentive based on private property rights is unparalleled.Without this incentive, technological inventions cannot be forced.

Third, the rapid cashing out of wealth represented by the stock market will inspire more people to devote themselves to scientific research and give birth to a culture of innovation.The United Kingdom was the place where the industrial revolution started, but it was later caught up and overtaken by the United States, making the United States the world's leading technological invention center in the past 150 years. One important reason is that the incentive environment in the United Kingdom is not as good as that in the United States.Until the end of the 19th century, the British stock market traded mainly bonds.The U.S. stock market, since the middle of the 19th century, has set off a wave of stock issuance and trading booms one after another for railways, telephones, automobiles, computers, etc., which soon made it the most developed stock market with the largest trading volume in the world. .In this way, successful entrepreneurs and innovators can sell the shares of established enterprises at a very good price when they are still very young, and cash in the future income stream of their enterprises in advance.In other words, in a traditional society without a developed stock market like the United States, even if an entrepreneur is very successful, the fruit of his success will have to wait for decades or more than a hundred years to be realized year by year, and it will take several generations. Only people can realize wealth.However, through the stock market, you can realize your expected future wealth in advance today.The acceleration and advance of the wealth redemption cycle will definitely attract more followers and encourage everyone to innovate and start a business.

In recent years, many Chinese IT, Internet, and mobile phone companies have listed on Nasdaq, taking advantage of the opportunities of globalization and turning the creativity of many young people into wealth in a short period of time.In August of this year (2005, editor's note), on the day Baidu was listed on NASDAQ, the stock price reached 120 US dollars, and 37-year-old Robin Li became a rich man with 900 million US dollars overnight.Not only that, seven of Baidu's employees are worth US$100 million, and more than 100 are worth US$10 million, and many of these people are young people who graduated from college five years ago.The extensive media coverage of these cases will stimulate many young people's interest in technology, and make each of them realize that through innovation, they can also become the next Robin Li and create the next Baidu.Gates of the United States became a billionaire when he was 28, and Dell and others.There have been tens of millions of stories like Robin Li and Gates created by the stock market in American society in the past 150 years. Can you imagine the significance of their demonstration effect to American innovation culture?The ability of the stock market to accelerate the speed of wealth realization is truly exciting!

In fact, because China's IT industry has created wealth myths one by one through listing in the United States, the innovation vitality of this industry has become the first among all industries in China.One of the effects of financial globalization is to bring American culture of innovation and entrepreneurship into China. ◎Reporter: Then, compared with the domestic situation, in your opinion, what problems exist in China's current science and technology system? Chen Zhiwu: The first prize of the China Natural Science Award has been vacant for 4 consecutive years, and the first prize of the National Technological Invention Award has been vacant for 6 consecutive years.This shows that domestic scientific research lacks original innovations and major discoveries of intellectual property rights.There are many problems in the middle, and the main reasons are as follows:

Administrative problems of science and technology management and science and technology research.The government's management system for science and technology basically uses various plans, from the most upstream basic research such as the 973 plan to the high-tech development plan 863, to the downstream "Spark Plan". It is very traditional, and the color of the plan is quite strong. The most important manifestation is the process of "project establishment-application-research-report for awards-award evaluation".The administrative problem of science and technology management determines that the evaluation, selection, and flow of talents are controlled by some administrative personnel. Ordinary administrative personnel in scientific research institutions should do auxiliary work for professionals, but they can often lead and command experts.The financial personnel in each organization originally only implemented professional leadership decisions, but they approved and even decided on some specific project funds of professional departments.The influence of financial personnel on science and technology funding becomes the influence on the direction of science and technology.We know that no major invention in the world is planned by administrative officials. Planning and innovation are two contradictory things. If they can be planned, there must be no innovation.

The second is the nature of state-owned enterprises and state-owned units.At present, we still mainly rely on state-owned units and state-owned enterprises for scientific research and innovation. The experience of the past few decades tells us that there will be no way out.On the one hand, state-owned units lack sufficient incentives.On the other hand, even if state-owned units create new technologies, they will not open up the market after innovation like Baidu and Sina. Insufficient protection of intellectual property rights.An invention created by a person who works so hard is easily counterfeited or counterfeited. This kind of behavior is often not punished, and the result will inevitably dampen people's enthusiasm for scientific research.

Protection of private property remains unreliable.The sanctity of private property has not yet become the consensus of the government and the whole society. People who own wealth have unclear expectations for the future, and often have no long-term plans and desires for long-term investment. The capital market is underdeveloped.The role of the domestic stock market is to a large extent to solve the difficulties of state-owned enterprises, so state-owned enterprises are mainly listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and Shanghai Stock Exchange.It is very difficult for private companies to go public, the approval process is very troublesome, and the possibility of getting approval is very small.Such a stock market has little effect on stimulating the culture of innovation.

School education is mainly based on examinations, and does not encourage or even suppress students' creative spirit.Although domestic middle school students frequently win prizes in international Olympic competitions, they are the result of pre-doing a lot of difficult exercises. Their innovative thinking has not been improved at all, and they cannot form an innovative spirit at all.It is a waste of Chinese creativity to let so many people waste their energy on international Olympic competitions. ◎Reporter: Now there is a concept that as long as leadership is strengthened, efforts are concentrated, and investment is increased, technological innovation can be improved. Chen Zhiwu: This is a typical old way of thinking.From the Westernization Movement to the "Great Leap Forward" and then to the "Cultural Revolution", the Chinese pursued this set of logic, and what did it look like in the end?We used to believe that in order to develop scientific and technological innovation, we must first have scientific and technological talents, and second, we must have research funds.We now have tens of thousands of first-class scientific and technological talents, and we have received a lot of funds through the investment of the state, but we have not yet made breakthrough technological innovations. What is going on? If we continue to use this old way of thinking and continue to rely on public ownership and state-owned enterprises to develop science and technology, at best it will only improve the level of science and technology in the military, national defense and other fields, and it is impossible to make major breakthroughs in civilian science and technology.Historically, from the beginning of German reunification in the mid-19th century to before World War II, Germany relied on state investment to invest in scientific research; Japan before World War II did the same; the Soviet Union also adopted a scientific and technological system based on state-owned enterprises.However, they all have a common feature, that is, desperately developing military technology and ignoring civilian use.This one-sided development led directly to two world wars in Germany and laid the groundwork for Japan's invasion of China and other Asian countries.The Soviet Union's aerospace technology and nuclear technology were once ahead of the world, but now it seems that there are not many technologies that benefit humans that were brought about by the Soviet Union's technological development. In the United Kingdom and the United States, the investment in national defense science and technology does depend on the state, but the state does not intervene in other fields. The government does not have a Ministry of Science and Technology or a Ministry of Industry.If an individual wants to research and innovate something, he has to find money by himself and prove to others that his innovation can bring benefits. Usually, only technologies that are welcomed by tens of thousands of people will bring large-scale benefits.This will invisibly cause funds to be mainly invested in technologies that can improve people's lives and increase productivity.Coupled with the incentives provided by the private property rights system, people will try their best to innovate technology and tap the market potential of any technology. In the bureaucratic scientific and technological system, attention is often placed on aspects that bureaucrats can understand, think of, and bring immediate results, rather than the real needs and directions of scientific development.When I was a graduate student at the National University of Defense Technology in the early 1980s, the school was developing the "Galaxy" computer, and the measurement standard for its effectiveness was completely indicative: 100 million or 1 billion calculations per second, Wait, no one has calculated its cost and social impact, and no one has an incentive to develop applications to realize the potential of the "Galaxy" computer.This kind of technological development, except that it will add one more thing to the future computer museum, does not have much progress at all.However, the "Galaxy" computer is still being developed one generation after another, and the country is still investing heavily. Who is this for?for what? China can no longer make the mistakes of the Soviet Union.The inevitable result of the country's all-inclusive development of science and technology is that individual creativity is suppressed, and no one pursues social and economic effects.Only in the field of basic research that cannot be solved by private individuals, the state needs to take action.In the development of science and technology, the role of the state is to build institutional mechanisms and platforms to encourage innovation.Why do many people develop better after going abroad?Not because they become smarter after going abroad, but because the incentive platform there is better. ◎Reporter: The current domestic science and technology system is indeed dominated by the state, and the most typical manifestation is that the state allocates scientific research funds. Chen Zhiwu: This approach has a lot of side effects.After observation, I found that universities and research institutions in Beijing receive much more funding than their counterparts in other places.Some universities in Guangzhou have much higher levels of scientific research than Beijing in certain fields, but they receive very little funding.Even in Shanghai, in a famous school like Fudan University, the teachers' confidence level is much lower than that of Peking University and Tsinghua University.Most of the people who control the allocation of funds and resources are in Beijing, which provides Beijing's academic institutions with a unique advantage, so that researchers from Fudan University, Sun Yat-sen University and other schools cannot compare with them. Centralized distribution of scientific research funds by the state will also lead to unfair distribution and corruption.As far as I know, academic institutions in Hunan, Guangdong and other places will give scientific researchers a special vacation during the summer, allowing them to "operate" with the members of the academic committee who are in charge of funding allocation and academic degrees. For a budget of 300,000, 50,000 to 100,000 "operating expenses" will do.Moreover, there is also a lack of supervision on the use of funds after they are issued, and sometimes they become the personal income of scientific researchers.I once asked a colleague, you can't pay yourself a salary after getting the funds, you can only reimburse yourself, do you need to spend so much money?He said, it's very simple, just buy fake invoices.Buying fake invoices is an economic crime in foreign countries, and you will be prosecuted, but it is fine in China.At the entrance of the subway station in Beijing, there are people selling fake invoices and real invoices everywhere. This is a spectacle unique to China.People often send messages to my e-mail from China, offering to sell me fake invoices.Would this be the case if the state had not monopolized the distribution of scientific research funding? ◎Reporter: What do you think of the successful launch of the "Shenzhou 6" spacecraft? Chen Zhiwu: I personally think that the success of "Shenzhou 6" is still achieved under a scientific and technological system similar to that of the Soviet Union and Germany, and the cost is very high. "Shenzhou 6" does illustrate China's scientific and technological progress in the aerospace field, but what benefits can it bring to ordinary people's daily lives?People should think more about this question.When people's life on earth is still not guaranteed, and when so many peasant children cannot even complete the basic 9-year compulsory education, it seems that too much energy should not be put on space technology.In terms of stimulating scientific and technological progress, I think the role of "Shenzhou 6" is not as great as Baidu's listing. ◎Reporter: However, the "Manhattan" project of the United States to develop the atomic bomb and the "Apollo" project to land on the moon were all carried out under the auspices of the government, and finally set off a technological revolution in China? Chen Zhiwu: The "Manhattan Project" and "Apollo Project" were indeed led by the US government, but most of their actual work was done by private companies.In this case, technology can be easily marketized and transformed into civilian use.Therefore, Americans can obtain more than 3,000 patents from the moon landing program, and rely on the technology obtained from the space program to increase the US economy's income by 2 trillion US dollars. ◎Reporter: Exam-oriented education is widely criticized for not encouraging students to think independently and suppressing their creativity.But a practical problem is that there are many students, and everyone wants to go to a famous school, and the pressure of competition always exists.In this case, one-sided pursuit of achievement is a very realistic choice. Chen Zhiwu: Indeed.Parents force their children to go to Peking University and Tsinghua University, and take the single-plank bridge, which has caused many social problems.Therefore, the state cannot put all educational resources in public schools. It should encourage the existence and development of private schools and provide secondary school graduates with another way out.Public school curricula are often the same for decades, with little incentive to change.Because of the high fees, private schools have to consider the needs of students more, and the curriculum will be much more flexible to better meet the needs of society.Nowadays, many institutions in society do not recognize diplomas from private schools, mainly because the schools are state-owned on the one hand, and more employers are also state-owned on the other hand, so they all pursue diplomas.This problem does not exist in the United States. When companies are recruiting, degrees and schools are the second considerations, and the most important thing is to look at your ability.This is because American companies are basically private, and they will be eclectic in selecting candidates.Bureaucratic state-owned enterprises require diplomas and certificates for everything.With the development of China's private economy, the education system that focuses on exams and emphasizes diplomas will gradually change, and students don't have to regard Peking University and Tsinghua University as a single-plank bridge. ◎Reporter: Now, not only students, but also college teachers are under great pressure. They are required to publish a certain number of articles every year, otherwise they may lose their jobs.At Yale University, how does the school evaluate and assess teachers? Chen Zhiwu: In American universities, if tenured professors are achieved, the number of academic papers is very relaxed.At Yale, most people do academic research because they love it, revel in it, it's a natural inclination.These people go to the enterprise and their income will increase a lot, but they would rather stay in the university.In the selection process of tenured professors, the number of papers is not a hard indicator, but the quality. You only need two or three influential papers.The evaluation of the thesis is also made in the academic circle, depending on the evaluation of peers in other universities.Professors are very concerned about their reputation, if you bribe or solicit connections in the selection process, it will often backfire. ◎Reporter: In recent decades, there has been a general phenomenon in Chinese society that emphasis is placed on science rather than literature, on natural sciences and less on social sciences, and the academicians of the two academies are basically engaged in natural science research.How do you view this phenomenon? Chen Zhiwu: In the past, people believed that with the development of natural sciences, the level of science and technology will rise, and society will also progress accordingly, so no one pays attention to social sciences.The facts of these years have shown that simple scientific knowledge does not necessarily lead to social progress.People who have scientific knowledge and have mastered technology are only the prerequisites for social progress.If there is no social science research on incentives and property rights protection mechanisms, the development of science and technology will be very difficult, or technology will be used for things that are not good for society.No matter how advanced the technology is, the unreliable political system may destroy the scientific and technological achievements accumulated by several generations overnight. ◎Reporter: In recent years, domestic media have often mentioned India's technological progress. How is India's technological system different from China's? Chen Zhiwu: India was a regulated economy before the 1990s. The main difference from China is that the private economy has a relatively high component.Everyone mentioned India's technological progress, mainly referring to its strong IT outsourcing capabilities.On the one hand, this is because Indians speak better English, so there is more room for business development.On the other hand, India has also used the US stock market, a machine for cashing out wealth in advance, to stimulate the development of its IT industry.In addition, India is much more reliable than China in the protection of private property and intellectual property, and its judiciary is also independent, which is very important for the protection of private property and intellectual property.In addition, there is no essential difference in the technological systems of the two countries. ◎Reporter: Now there is a saying that some things in Chinese traditional culture, such as the official standard and great unification, hinder the progress of science and technology. How do you view the role of cultural factors in the progress of science and technology? Chen Zhiwu: The reason why there is an official standard and unification is because the state monopolizes all social resources.On the one hand, this and that must be subject to administrative approval, and on the other hand, the state competes with the people for profit through state-owned business.Therefore, everyone is forced to become an official, and people who do not understand technology are allowed to manage the allocation of funds.In my opinion, culture is not static.Once the monopoly position of the country changes, the culture will also change, and the tendency to yearn for being an official will change accordingly.As long as a culture can tolerate freedom of thought and innovation, it can bring out the potential of scientific and technological progress. ◎Reporter: Please imagine, if you had never gone abroad, would you have achieved what you are today? Chen Zhiwu: It is very difficult, at least it is impossible to have such a promising future in academic research.I studied engineering at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels in China, but I realized at that time that technology itself is useless without institutional guarantees.So when I stayed in school after graduating from graduate school, I asked to be a teacher in the political teaching and research section, wanting to study the institutional guarantees of technology and social development.However, when I got there, my main job was to do odd jobs: a carload of apples came to the unit, and I asked each teacher how many catties you wanted, and then knocked on doors to collect money, and then delivered the apples to each home.So, after working for a year, I went abroad to study economics at Yale University.Now that I think about it, even if I didn’t do chores at that time and stayed in China, I’m afraid my achievements today would be very limited due to the lack of free academic research space.