دانلود کتاب تحقیقات غیر متعارف مدیریت اضطراری

As Lao Tzu said, “A huge tree grows from a tiny seedling; a nine-storied tower rises from a heap of earth.” Basic research is the fundamental approach to fostering innovation-driven development, and its level becomes an important yardstick for measuring the overall scientific and national strength of a country. Since the begin-ning of the twenty-first century, China’s overall strength in basic research has been consistently increasing. With respect to input and output, China’s input in basic research increased by 14.8 times from 5.22 billion yuan in 2001 to 82.29 billion yuan in 2016, with an average annual increase of 20.2%. In the same period, the number of China’s scientific papers included in the Science Citation Index (SCI) increased from lower than 40,000 to 324,000; China rose from the 6th to 2nd place in global ranking in terms of the number of published papers. In regard to the quality of output, in 2016, China ranked No. 2 in the world in terms of citations in 9 disci-plines, among which materials science ranked No. 1; as of October 2017, China ranked No. 3 in the world in the number of both Highly Cited Papers (top 1%) and Hot Papers (top 0.1%), with the latter accounting for 25.1% of the global total. In talent cultivation, in 2006, China had 175 scientists (136 of whom from the Chinese mainland) included in Thomson Reuters’ list of Highly Cited Researchers, ranking 4th globally and 1st in Asia.

Meanwhile, we should also be keenly aware that China’s basic research is still facing great challenges. First, funding for basic research in China is still far less than that in developed countries—only about 5% of the R&D funds in China are used for basic research, a much lower percentage than 15%–20% in developed countries. Second, competence for original innovation in China is insufficient. Major original scientific achievements that have a global impact are still rare. Most of the scientific research projects are just a follow-up or imitation of existing research, rather than groundbreaking research. Third, the development of disciplines is not balanced, and China’s research level in some disciplines is noticeably lower than the international level—China’s Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) in disciplines just reached 0.94 in 2016, lower than the world average of 1.0.