What's new

China, the 3rd most innovative country in the world

ao333

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
1,289
Reaction score
0
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Britons lose faith in their powers of invention, survey shows

AstraZeneca's survey, which polled 6,000 people in six countries, showed that America is still viewed as the most innovative country, after Japan and China

28hjslc.jpg

James Caan, entrepreneur and Dragons' Den panellist, says we need an identity – 'We need products and services that we can all be proud of.' Photograph Rex Features

Britain once ruled a third of the world and its technological edge allowed it to run rings round its competitors. How different things are today. Britons have scarcely any confidence in the nation's ability to remain as innovative as its rivals, according to a study to be published this week. There is a pervasive fear the UK will slip further down the international league table, as the balance of power shifts from west to east.

Britons expect China to replace Japan and the US as the new global standard bearer for innovation by 2020, a view widely held in other countries. Almost two thirds of Britons feel their country is not as innovative as it used to be, despite government efforts to create a culture where enterprise and innovation can flourish.

Only 7% of us consider the UK to be the world's most innovative nation, indicating an absence of self-belief, according to the research, produced by pharmaceuticals company AstraZeneca.

UK entrepreneur and Dragons' Den panellist Peter Jones says: "The government is hoping for what George Osborne has called 'the enterprise-led recovery'. What this means is an entrepreneur and innovation-led recovery.

"It's the right idea, but we have a long way to go before we achieve it. The first thing we need to do is embed the idea of enterprise education into our young people."

Peter Bazalgette, the media entrepreneur behind television's Big Brother, says when you start from scratch, the banks fail to provide enough support and are "needlessly risk averse".

He says business angels, affluent individuals who provide capital for business start-ups, are a better bet. Britain needs to become more like America, where people who fail in business are "encouraged to try again".

The Federation of Small Businesses says much has been achieved by agencies set up to stimulate innovation such as the Technology Strategy Board (TSB). "But more needs to be done, especially in areas such as education."

A TSB spokesman says: "Our aim is to promote, support and invest in technology research and commercialisation. We want the UK to be a global leader in innovation, but we must work hard to achieve our goals."

AstraZeneca's survey, which polled 6,000 people in a number of countries, showed that America is still viewed as the most innovative country, after Japan and China. Just 3% of the respondents consider the UK to be the most creative, with a majority saying China will become "the world's powerhouse of innovation" within a decade.

The report says there is a marked east-west divide in terms of what people regard as the most important scientific achievements and inventions of the last century. For India, China and Japan, the greatest achievements have been instant global communication and the internet. By contrast, Britain and Sweden view advances in medicine as the most important breakthroughs.

Developing countries are confident about their ability to invent and improve their scientific and technological standing. More than half of those surveyed in China and India thought their countries would be the most innovative by 2020.

Americans were also optimistic, with 28% believing their country would hold the top slot over the next 10 years. But just one in 20 Britons believe the UK will hold this title.

Not all British businessmen are downcast. Charles Dunstone, chairman of Carphone Warehouse, believes we are innovative, but as a country "we tend to be self-deprecating. And unlike 25 years ago, it's quite cool these days to want to start your own business – the dotcom boom helped greatly in this respect".

James Caan, another Dragons' Den panellist, says: "We have more than 4.9m small and medium enterprises [SMEs] and it's estimated that half a million new businesses will have started this year. Recession draws out the entrepreneurial spirits in people and the motivation to build their fortunes."

Caan says: "The recent spending review has put more pressure on the education sector; we need to ramp up science and technology throughout the education system.

"If you imagine the world as a high street, and every country had a shop window, what would be in the shop window of Great Britain? We need an identity, we need products and services that we identify with and be proud of."

Caan believes the authorities should make it easier for entrepreneurs to start a business in the first place.

"We should be reducing the amount of red tape and regulation. Particularly in employment law. For example, companies which employ five or even 10 people should be exempt from some of the regulations that apply to large corporates." "The government should introduce a tiered approach so that the regulation is appropriately applied depending on the size of the company."

Nick Badman, chairman of the Peter Cullum Centre for Entrepreneurship at Cass Business School, says research and development at British software and biotech firms is "of a very high order".

But start-ups would be helped by less bureaucracy and more generous tax breaks.

Badman says his former employer, 3i, the stock-market-listed venture capital group, has rejigged its portfolio over the years to make it more international and less UK-centric. But 3i is hardly unique in embracing globalisation.

"No company can afford to ignore profitable opportunities overseas," says Badman. "But that means we have to do more here to keep ahead of the game."

Asked about specific innovations over the past century, respondents to the survey said the internet, computers and electricity were generally seen as the most important.

But people in the US, Britain and Sweden placed greater importance on the invention of vaccines and antibiotics. At present, America is seen as the most innovative country by its own citizens, as well as by people in China, India and Japan; while in Britain and Sweden, Japan is viewed as the most innovative.

But the Chinese believe they will eventually overtake the States. The survey says: "Looking to the future, almost six in 10 Chinese think their country will be the most innovative by 2020."

The Chinese told the pollsters that the internet and computers had had the greatest impact on their lives. Instant global communications is seen by 47% as the greatest achievement of the last century, followed by the eradication of serious diseases (19%).

Of all the countries, only China considers those who work in creative industries to rank alongside scientists and engineers in terms of innovation. And a considerably higher proportion of Chinese respondents consider fashion designers and artists to be particularly innovative.

Indians view scientists and engineers as the most creative professions, and highlight American companies such as Microsoft, IBM and Apple as the most innovative companies. But they also rate Indian firms, such as Tata, Infosys and Reliance Industries.

Britons believe the internet and antibiotics are the greatest innovations of the last 100 years, followed by vaccines. But one quarter of British people consider the internet to be the innovation that has had the greatest impact on their lives.

Britons lose faith in their powers of invention, survey shows | Business | The Observer

This article defies all that you people are not.
 
2009 Innovation Index Country Ranking

1. Singapore

2. South Korea

3. Switzerland

4. Iceland

5. Ireland

6. Hong Kong

7. Finland

8. United States

9. Japan

10. Sweden

11. Denmark

12. Netherlands

13. Luxembourg

14. Canada

15. United Kingdom

16. Israel

17. Austria

18. Norway

19. Germany

20. France

21. Malaysia

22. Australia

23. Estonia

24. Spain

25. Belgium

26. New Zealand

27. China........
 
But the Chinese believe they will eventually overtake the States. The survey says: "Looking to the future, almost six in 10 Chinese think their country will be the most innovative by 2020."

It's a good goal to set, we'll have to work very hard to achieve this. :tup:
 
2009 Innovation Index Country Ranking

1. Singapore

2. South Korea

3. Switzerland

4. Iceland

5. Ireland

6. Hong Kong

7. Finland

8. United States

9. Japan

10. Sweden

11. Denmark

12. Netherlands

13. Luxembourg

14. Canada

15. United Kingdom

16. Israel

17. Austria

18. Norway

19. Germany

20. France

21. Malaysia

22. Australia

23. Estonia

24. Spain

25. Belgium

26. New Zealand

27. China........

That's the American view of Chinese. The article reflected British view of Chinese.
 
China is 3rd place in technological innovation.

China is still #27 in overall score

China still has a long road of development
 
Congratulations Guys, China has been Leading the developing World By there footmarks In Almost every field of Science and Technology.... It is Nothing but a matter of pride that a Country which has been Underestimated by Many Countries Has Drawn a Road Map into the Future of Innovation....
 
More funding and greater integration with the world of academia. China is ignoring the vast untapped potential/resource in over-seas Chinese academics who would love to work on joint projects with those who from China.

I personally know of a couple of these joint projects and they have yielded great results for both sides.
 
More funding and greater integration with the world of academia. China is ignoring the vast untapped potential/resource in over-seas Chinese academics who would love to work on joint projects with those who from China.

I personally know of a couple of these joint projects and they have yielded great results for both sides.

i thought these were already very tapped and very popular. in fact, the real danger is the untapped resources of those who get passed over in favor of a flashier overseas researcher. we don't need too much theoretical research. we need easier, but more useful, applied research that doesn't get nobel prizes but gets straight forward useful results.
 
2009 Innovation Index Country Ranking

1. Singapore

2. South Korea

3. Switzerland

4. Iceland

5. Ireland

6. Hong Kong

7. Finland

8. United States

9. Japan

10. Sweden

11. Denmark

12. Netherlands

13. Luxembourg

14. Canada

15. United Kingdom

16. Israel

17. Austria

18. Norway

19. Germany

20. France

21. Malaysia

22. Australia

23. Estonia

24. Spain

25. Belgium

26. New Zealand

27. China........

I do not believe Malaysia is ranked 21st while Australia is 22 and China 27. Australia and China should be ranked above Malaysia. I believe the list is flawed.
 
i thought these were already very tapped and very popular. in fact, the real danger is the untapped resources of those who get passed over in favor of a flashier overseas researcher. we don't need too much theoretical research. we need easier, but more useful, applied research that doesn't get nobel prizes but gets straight forward useful results.

There's no technology without science.
 
US is the most technologically advanced country because she has the complete civilian and military technologies. Russia has complete military technologies, but without many civilian technologies, China now has developed complete independent military industries and partial civilian technologies.
 
2009 Innovation Index Country Ranking

1. Singapore

2. South Korea

3. Switzerland

4. Iceland

5. Ireland

6. Hong Kong

7. Finland

8. United States

9. Japan

10. Sweden

11. Denmark

12. Netherlands

13. Luxembourg

14. Canada

15. United Kingdom

16. Israel

17. Austria

18. Norway

19. Germany

20. France

21. Malaysia

22. Australia

23. Estonia

24. Spain

25. Belgium

26. New Zealand

27. China........

What kind of list is this?
Hong Kong, Singapore and Iceland beat US and Japan in innovation. What did Iceland invented? ice.
 
There's no technology without science.

of course there isn't, that's why you use public resources like arvix or protein database, and apply them using the training you've received in university. theoretical science has too high of a cost, is too slow and can be done for free by others, while applied science and engineering produces immediate results.

have you read any chemistry papers? with the exception of the computational papers (almost all of them, sadly), biochemical x-ray diffraction/NMR and mechanism studies, everything they do can be easily marketed, especially nano/polymers/materials, organic synthesis and instrumental analysis. in physics, only astrophysics and computational studies are not marketable. solid state electronics, optics and spectroscopy (overlap with chemistry) are highly marketable and demand less funding while producing more results than things like astrophysics or biochemistry.
 
of course there isn't, that's why you use public resources like arvix or protein database, and apply them using the training you've received in university. theoretical science has too high of a cost, is too slow and can be done for free by others, while applied science and engineering produces immediate results.

have you read any chemistry papers? with the exception of the computational papers (almost all of them, sadly), biochemical x-ray diffraction/NMR and mechanism studies, everything they do can be easily marketed, especially nano/polymers/materials, organic synthesis and instrumental analysis. in physics, only astrophysics and computational studies are not marketable. solid state electronics, optics and spectroscopy (overlap with chemistry) are highly marketable and demand less funding while producing more results than things like astrophysics or biochemistry.

Science is the "why" and technology is the "how" in math problems. Which one will take you further? "Process more important than results" - http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90780/91343/6224977.html

I'm not arguing against technology, but for proportional investment in science.
 
Last edited:
Cancer diagnosis breakthrough

"Cancer diagnosis breakthrough
October 1, 2010 by Lin Edwards

taiwancancerdiagnosis.jpg

Image credit: J. Am. Chem. Soc., doi:10.1021/ja1035013

(PhysOrg.com) -- Researchers in Taiwan have developed a new imaging contrast agent that will enable cancer patients to undergo CT and MRI scans on the same day, cutting diagnosis time in half.

When cancer patients undergo computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, they are injected with an imaging contrast agent, and they must wait at least 24 hours for the previous contrast agent to clear before having the next scan. Now, for the first time, a research team in Taiwan has developed a contrast agent that can be used for both scans.

The new technology was developed by a team led by Professor Chen Chia-chun of Academia Sinica and the Chemistry Department of the National Taiwan Normal University in Taipei, and Professor Shieh Dar-bin, a doctor and lecturer at the National Cheng Kung University Institute of Oral Medicine and the Department of Stomatology in Tainan.

CT and MRI scans are time-consuming and expensive, and many patients have to wait up to two months to be examined so that a diagnosis can be confirmed. Professor Chen said some patients also develop side effects to the contrast agents currently used with the scans. Having a single contrast agent means the patient only needs one injection and can have both scans on the same day.

The new contrast agent for both CT and MRI scans consists of a water soluble alloy of iron (Fe) and platinum (Pt) nanoparticles up to 12 nanometers in diameter. The particles have been tested in vitro and in vivo and found to be stable and to have excellent biocompatibility and hemocompatibility. The FePt nanoparticles can also be mass produced, which would reduce their cost.

The new contrast agent shows the exact position of the tumor cells and the molecular characteristics of cancer lesions, which will help doctors to determine the best kind of chemotherapy to use on each patient.

The system will not be commercially available until clinical human trials have been completed, which will take approximately five years. When it does become available, Chen predicts it will become “a star product in the world’s nearly US$5 billion medical diagnosis market.”

The research results were published as a cover story in the Journal of the American Chemical Society on 29 September. The work was partly funded by the National Science Council. Patent applications have been made around the globe.

More information: Shang-Wei Chou et al., In Vitro and in Vivo Studies of FePt Nanoparticles for Dual Modal CT/MRI Molecular Imaging, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2010, 132 (38), pp 13270-13278. DOI:10.1021/ja1035013

© 2010 PhysOrg.com"
 
Back
Top Bottom