||
百年尺度上的河东河西
武夷山
Technology in Society杂志2008年3/4期合刊发表了J. Thomas Ratchford和William A. Blanpied的文章,Paths to the Future for Science and Technology in China, India and the US(中国、印度和美国通向未来科学技术之路径)。第一作者是美国乔治梅森大学法学院“国家技术与法律研究中心”的教授。在老布什执政期间,他担任过白宫科技政策办公室副主任,主管政策与国际事务。他是美中科技关系的专家,在这方面著述颇丰。我驻美期间,曾见过他。第二作者在2003年退休之前,长期担任国家科学基金会的资深国际分析师,组织过多次美中科技政策对话。
这篇文章从百年视野上作了一些对比:
公元1世纪,按购买力平价估计,印度占世界经济活动总量的1/3,中国占1/4,罗马帝国约占1/5.
一千年后,印度仍是世界第一,中国仍是世界第二。到了1500年,两国所占份额基本持平,各1/4左右。1600年时,中国追了上去。1700年时,两国又持平,各占世界经济总量份额为1/5至1/4之间。此时,美国经济总量排在墨西哥和比利时之后。
到1700年,莫卧儿帝国开始衰落,英国在世界上的影响力崛起,导致印度经济衰退。到1800年时,中国经济总量占世界的1/3,是印度的两倍。
美国的技术在19世纪初繁荣起来。到19世纪末,美国在许多经济领域里都居于技术领先地位。
1940年,美国研发总支出为3.45亿美元左右,按2000年不变价格估计则是37.5亿美元。其中,私营企业的研发支出占67.8%。
1950年起,政府研发支出在全国研发支出总额中的比例逐渐增加,1965年时达到68%。
苏联人造卫星上天后,为了应对挑战,美国建立了总统科技顾问制度。大家公认,自从Jerome Wiesner担任肯尼迪总统的科技顾问以来,在老布什任职的1989-1993年期间担任科技顾问兼白宫科技政策办公室主任的Alan Bromley(原为耶鲁大学物理学教授),是为美国科技事业做出了明显贡献的一位最管用的科技顾问。
后记:闵应骅老师问此文想说明什么?补充说明一下。
我摘取历史数据的目的,一是希望让大家感受到“势”(Momentum?)的重要。这样头脑清醒一些。
二是“时”(Contingency?)的重要。比如,我们现在几乎都认为企业研发份额高才正常,美国却经历过企业研发份额先高后低的过程--国际竞争的需要。
Abstract
China and India are frequently referred to as emerging superpowers. First, we present evidence that by virtue of their economic strength, their ability to absorb and adapt to repeated foreign intrusions, and their cultural reach, both countries should be more properly regarded as re-emerging superpowers. They qualified for that status even when the Roman Empire was at its peak, and continued to qualify until well into the seventeenth century. It was only with increasing intrusions by Europeans and, to a lesser extent Americans, from that time until well into the twentieth century, that their status began to be undermined. A series of short vignettes describing political, economic, and scientific milestones for China, India, and the United States illustrates the domestic evolution of the three countries since the middle of the twentieth century and the relationships among them.
Then we present highlights in the development of science and higher education: in China and India, from their first contacts with modern science to the present; and in the United States, from the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to the present. These highlights are followed by a short comparison of research and development expenditures in 1991 (the first year in which relatively complete, reliable data are available for China and India), and a brief explanation of their government science policy structures. We offer two “snapshots”—the first from 1995, the second from 2004—that provide detailed data on R&D investments and human resources in the three countries for those years.
We conclude by speculating on the future status of China, India, and the United States during the next half century. Will they continue to be superpowers? In what ways are their science policies likely to enable their superpower status? Will their status as superpowers provide the means to further strengthen their science and technology systems and lead to economic and military outputs of wide-ranging global significance?
Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )
GMT+8, 2024-7-18 16:25
Powered by ScienceNet.cn
Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社