The recent discovery of gravitational waves predicted by Albert Einstein highlights the importance of basic research, which is often overshadowed by the more tangible impact of applied science.

 

Commenting on the recent discovery of gravitational waves, Rafael Reif, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, emphasized the importance of basic research, which is often overshadowed by the more tangible impact of applied science.

“The discovery we celebrate today embodies the paradox of fundamental science: That it is painstaking, rigorous and slow – and electrifying, revolutionary and catalytic,” Reif said. “Without basic science, our best guess never gets any better, and ‘innovation’ is tinkering around the edges. With the advance of basic science, society advances, too.”
 

In fact, the power and beauty of fundamental research is evident not only in natural sciences but also in humanities and social sciences. Chinese academics have achieved encouraging results after years of unrelenting exploration in basic science and building a thriving academic environment. However, over the course of their development, some disciplines have failed to adopt the correct attitude toward fundamental research, neglecting talent cultivation and failing to invest sufficient resources.
 

Fundamental research requires a long cycle and massive amounts of stable resources, and it is difficult to make breakthroughs. Scholars said that most disciplines can ensure investment in basic research, but when human and financial resources are limited, they may be inclined toward applied research, which can realize quick returns for less investment.

Scholars said that these undesirable tendencies cannot be divorced from the current evaluation mechanism for academic achievements as well as the fickle academic and social environment.

First, intense quantitative assessments hinder the development of fundamental science. Niu Xinchun, director of the Institute of Middle East Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said that in an academic evaluation system characterized by intensifying and increasingly detailed assessments, fundamental science is at a disadvantage because its results are hard to quantify. As a result, some scholars have been forced to shift their focus from fundamental to applied research, he said.

In a broader social context in which material interests are overemphasized, it is difficult for academia to stay true to its purpose. Some scholars lack the extraordinary patience to do fundamental research.
 

Furthermore, Chinese academia relies too heavily on Western theories, falling short of academic self-consciousness. Many scholars admit that Western theories played a supplementary role in the infancy of China’s fundamental science, but indiscriminate, blind belief in Western theories has obstructed in-depth exploration of a fundamental theoretical system that is in line with Chinese experience and realities.
 

In addition, there is an artificial separation between fundamental and applied research. Lu Yilong, a professor of sociology from Renmin University of China, said that there was originally no gulf between fundamental and applied research, but due to a lack of academic tolerance, the tension between the two was created.
 

The relationship between fundamental and applied research is of particular significance in building a new model of think tanks with Chinese characteristics. Jing Linbo, director of the Chinese Evaluation Center for Humanities and Social Sciences under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said that only when applied studies are propped up by solid fundamental research can they be powerful and profound.

When building a new model of think tanks with Chinese characteristics, fundamental and applied research must be put on an equal footing. “We should resolutely oppose utilitarian tendencies in some think tanks that rapidly put forward a series of ‘ideas’ to gain short-term recognition and gain status as a think tank,” he said.
 

“We should deepen applied research by strengthening fundamental studies and enrich fundamental science by promoting applied research to realize effective combination and favorable interaction between the two,” said Wang Puqu, director of the Co-innovation Center for State Governance at Peking University, stressing the importance of coordinating resources in academic activities based on the characteristics of different disciplines.
 

Li Jingyuan, a CASS Member and former director of the Institute of Philosophy at CASS, called for more efforts to deepen the understanding of fundamental research, more policy guidance and support to fundamental research when it comes to the allocation of academic resources, thereby propelling the shaping of a fundamental theory system with distinct Chinese characteristics.
 

Some other scholars appealed for an evaluation mechanism that favors accumulation in fundamental research and moderate loosening of quantitative assessments for scholars. “The evaluation system should strike a balance between supervising the output of research results and guaranteeing the research autonomy of scholars,” Niu said.
 

 

 Mao Li is a reporter at the Chinese Social Sciences Today.