China’s research sector has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, driving a major increase in scientific publications and global research influence. Much of this growth has been supported by a funding system that directs resources to scientists selected through prestigious national and regional talent programmes. These initiatives have helped Chinese researchers publish in leading academic journals, but they have also widened the gap between a small group of highly influential scholars and the country’s broader research community. For many early-career scientists, competition for funding, jobs and laboratory resources is becoming increasingly intense.
In China, the prestigious titles awarded to leading researchers are often referred to as academic “hats”. These titles can be granted through national talent-development programmes, elite young-scientist schemes and local government initiatives. Holding the right academic title can influence a researcher’s salary, access to laboratory space, promotion opportunities and eligibility for research funding. As a result, career advancement for many young scientists depends not only on research quality, but also on securing one of these highly competitive designations.
Why China needs to rethink its approach to research evaluation
The Chinese government is increasingly recognizing the unintended effects of its academic talent system. In June, Qiushi, the official journal of the Chinese Communist Party, published an influential article calling for reform of the country’s human-resources development strategy (see go.nature.com/45nd8hh). One statement particularly resonated with young researchers: academic titles and talent labels should return to their “academic and honorary nature” instead of being used mechanically to determine salaries or distribute resources. The statement reflects growing concern that systems designed to identify and reward scientific excellence can distort research incentives and concentrate opportunities among a small group of scholars.
Competition for research funding and the pressure facing early-career scientists are not unique to China. However, the scale of the country’s expanding research workforce has made the challenge especially severe. Chinese universities and research institutions admitted approximately 171,000 doctoral students in 2024, compared with about 54,000 in 2005 — an increase of more than 200%. As competition has intensified, academic “hats” have increasingly become administrative shortcuts for deciding which researchers receive funding, support and career opportunities.
Move beyond “publish or perish” by measuring behaviors that benefit academia
China’s tenure-track system is often described as an adaptation of the American and European models, but its operation is distinct. Newly appointed faculty members are typically assessed over three to six years against demanding criteria, including publication targets in specific journals, successful grant applications, teaching performance and the acquisition of recognized talent titles. This evaluation model has helped expand research output, but it has also intensified pressure on scientists and increased calls for a fairer, more balanced approach to research assessment.
Source: www.nature.com