英語(yǔ)資源頻道為大家整理的最新英語(yǔ)資源：西方應(yīng)將科學(xué)家派往中國(guó)，供大家參考:)
Sixty years ago, Francis Crick and James Watson announced their discovery of the structure of DNA. The academics themselves were an international pair: one was American, the other British. Back then, both needed to be in Cambridge to work together. Things had changed little in the 250 years since Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz argued about calculus. Today, however, duos such as Crick and Watson can work in different countries because technology has slashed the cost of collaborating among research leaders.
60年前，弗朗西斯·克里克(Francis Crick)和詹姆斯·沃森(James Watson)宣布，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)了脫氧核糖核酸(DNA)的結(jié)構(gòu)。這兩位學(xué)者是一對(duì)國(guó)際合作伙伴：一個(gè)是英國(guó)人，另一個(gè)是美國(guó)人。當(dāng)時(shí)，這種合作是建立在兩人都身在劍橋大學(xué)(Cambridge University)的基礎(chǔ)上。自艾薩克·牛頓(Isaac Newton)和戈特弗里德·萊布尼茨(Gottfried Leibniz)討論微積分以來(lái)的250年里，這種情況基本上沒有什么變化。但如今，像克里克和沃森這樣的合作伙伴可身在不同的國(guó)家工作，因?yàn)榭萍嫉陌l(fā)展大大降低了研究帶頭人之間的合作成本。 The UK, and Cambridge university, provide evidence of this change. Since 1981, the number of journal articles produced by UK researchers has risen 150 per cent, to about 100,000 articles a year. But when you look at domestic papers, where all of the authors were in Britain, output is almost flat. According to the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database of 12,000 journals, since 2010 the majority of journal articles with a British-based author has had at least one co-author from another country. 英國(guó)和劍橋大學(xué)為這種改變提供了證據(jù)。1981年以來(lái)，英國(guó)研究人員發(fā)表的期刊論文數(shù)量增長(zhǎng)了150%，達(dá)到每年10萬(wàn)篇左右。不過(guò)，如果你考察的是英國(guó)本土論文（即論文的作者全都住在英國(guó)），那么發(fā)表數(shù)量幾乎沒有變化。根據(jù)收錄有1.2萬(wàn)份期刊的湯森路透科學(xué)網(wǎng)(Thomson Reuters Web of Science)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)，自2010年以來(lái)，英國(guó)作者發(fā)表的期刊論文絕大多數(shù)都至少有一位來(lái)自其他國(guó)家的共同作者。 This is not a solely UK phenomenon. Research shows the same trend in the US, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland. Academics may reside in one country, but they belong to a community that has no boundaries. Their output is international. This has particularly affected cutting-edge research teams. We can measure the importance of research by counting how many times articles are subsequently cited by other researchers. The average citation impact of UK research is well above the world average. However, an article produced by a mixture of UK-based and foreign researchers can expect to be cited more than half as many times again compared with a wholly UK research team. 并非只有英國(guó)存在這種現(xiàn)象。研究表明，美國(guó)、德國(guó)、法國(guó)、荷蘭和瑞士也出現(xiàn)了同樣的趨勢(shì)。學(xué)者們可能住在不同的國(guó)家，但他們卻屬于一個(gè)無(wú)國(guó)界的團(tuán)體。他們的論文是國(guó)際合作的成果。這對(duì)最前沿研究團(tuán)隊(duì)的影響尤為明顯。我們可以通過(guò)統(tǒng)計(jì)論文被引用的次數(shù)來(lái)衡量研究成果的重要性。英國(guó)論文的平均引用次數(shù)遠(yuǎn)高于世界平均水平。但不出意料的是，英國(guó)研究人員與外國(guó)研究人員合作發(fā)表的論文的平均引用次數(shù)，要比英國(guó)本土論文的平均引用次數(shù)多出一半以上。 A network of elite institutions is emerging beyond national boundaries that is almost independent of their hinterlands. Cambridge’s top international partners are all leaders themselves: the Max Planck Institute, Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Caltech, Berkeley, Toronto, Heidelberg and Tokyo. 一個(gè)由精英研究機(jī)構(gòu)組成的網(wǎng)絡(luò)正在超越國(guó)界的限制，它幾乎獨(dú)立于這些機(jī)構(gòu)的所在國(guó)存在。劍橋的國(guó)際合作伙伴們自身也都是一流研究機(jī)構(gòu)：馬克斯·普朗克研究所(Max Planck Institute)、哈佛大學(xué)(Harvard)、麻省理工學(xué)院(MIT)、加州理工學(xué)院(Caltech)、加州大學(xué)伯克利分校(Berkeley)、多倫多大學(xué)(University of Toronto)、海德堡大學(xué)(Heidelberg)和東京大學(xué)(The University of Tokyo)。 Indeed, more than half of Cambridge’s research is joint with global partners. Its output is already high-impact, but it gets a citation boost from collaborative work. In the UK, the disparity in impact between domestic and international research is growing. Universities with few international partners are behind. 實(shí)際上，劍橋大學(xué)一半以上的研究是與其國(guó)際伙伴合作完成的。劍橋發(fā)表的論文本已具有很大的影響力，國(guó)際合作論文進(jìn)一步推高了劍橋論文的引用次數(shù)。在英國(guó)，本土論文和國(guó)際合作論文的影響力差距越來(lái)越大。沒有國(guó)際合作伙伴的大學(xué)落在了后面。 Outside Europe and North America, however, the pattern is different. Since 1981, domestic research has at least trebled among the Bric nations. Growth was astronomic in China, where research by teams there has grown tenfold since 1997 and is now 30 per cent greater than the UK’s output. “Homegrown” research is also expanding rapidly in emerging research powers such as Brazil, India, South Korea and eastern Europe. 然而，在歐洲和北美以外地區(qū)，情況則有所不同。自1981年以來(lái)，金磚四國(guó)(BRIC)的本土論文數(shù)量至少增長(zhǎng)了兩倍。中國(guó)論文數(shù)量的增長(zhǎng)可謂“天文數(shù)字”——中國(guó)研究團(tuán)隊(duì)的論文數(shù)量自1997年以來(lái)增長(zhǎng)了9倍，目前的數(shù)字比英國(guó)高出30%。巴西、印度、韓國(guó)和東歐國(guó)家等新興論文大國(guó)的“本土”論文數(shù)量也在迅速增長(zhǎng)。 This transformation is creating a massive global research industry that is causing some big problems for national science policy makers in advanced economies. First, reading the published output of academics from these more closed academic communities will not give our researchers access to their culture, priority setting and problem solving. So the research superpowers must start expanding partnerships between their own institutions and leading ones in the emerging research nations. Stop worrying about brain drains: the west needs to start sending scientists to work in these countries. 這種轉(zhuǎn)變催生出一個(gè)龐大的全球研究產(chǎn)業(yè)，為發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體的國(guó)家科學(xué)政策制定者帶來(lái)了一些重大問題。首先，我們的研究人員無(wú)法通過(guò)閱讀這些較為封閉的學(xué)術(shù)團(tuán)體發(fā)表的論文，來(lái)了解他們的文化、優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)制定以及問題解決機(jī)制。因此，論文超級(jí)大國(guó)必須著手?jǐn)U大本國(guó)研究機(jī)構(gòu)與新興論文國(guó)家主要研究機(jī)構(gòu)的合作。別再擔(dān)心人才流失：西方有必要派出科學(xué)家到這些新興國(guó)家工作。 Furthermore, it will be tougher for governments in the west to capture future returns on investment in research. Future innovation and developments are increasingly likely to have owners in several countries. It will not be possible to generate, corral and contain the innovative knowledge within one country, so governments need to be training and retaining the people who know how to use these discoveries. 此外，西方國(guó)家的政府未來(lái)將更加難以從研發(fā)投資中收獲回報(bào)。未來(lái)的創(chuàng)新和開發(fā)越來(lái)越有可能歸多個(gè)國(guó)家的研究人員所有。單獨(dú)一個(gè)國(guó)家不可能創(chuàng)造、圈護(hù)和控制創(chuàng)新知識(shí)，因此，各國(guó)政府需要培養(yǎng)和留住那些懂得如何運(yùn)用這些發(fā)現(xiàn)的人才。 The primary reason for investing in the research base is to support great research. What they produce pays off in unpredictable ways, often with huge social and economic benefits. In the short term, a research base that spawned both Newton and Crick produces people who can drive innovation in business. But the challenge of weaving research into economic success is no longer just about getting the best brains into labs in your own country. 投資研究基地的主要原因是要為重大研究提供支持。研究成果的影響是不可預(yù)知的，往往會(huì)帶來(lái)巨大的社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)效益。短期而言，培養(yǎng)出牛頓和克里克二人的研究基地會(huì)培養(yǎng)出能夠推動(dòng)商業(yè)創(chuàng)新的人才。但要想把研究成果轉(zhuǎn)化為經(jīng)濟(jì)成果，面臨的挑戰(zhàn)將不再只是把秀的人才招攬至本國(guó)實(shí)驗(yàn)室。 The writer is director of research at Thomson Reuters IP and Science 本文作者是湯森路透知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)與科技(Thomson Reuters IP and Science)研究主管
60年前，弗朗西斯·克里克(Francis Crick)和詹姆斯·沃森(James Watson)宣布，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)了脫氧核糖核酸(DNA)的結(jié)構(gòu)。這兩位學(xué)者是一對(duì)國(guó)際合作伙伴：一個(gè)是英國(guó)人，另一個(gè)是美國(guó)人。當(dāng)時(shí)，這種合作是建立在兩人都身在劍橋大學(xué)(Cambridge University)的基礎(chǔ)上。自艾薩克·牛頓(Isaac Newton)和戈特弗里德·萊布尼茨(Gottfried Leibniz)討論微積分以來(lái)的250年里，這種情況基本上沒有什么變化。但如今，像克里克和沃森這樣的合作伙伴可身在不同的國(guó)家工作，因?yàn)榭萍嫉陌l(fā)展大大降低了研究帶頭人之間的合作成本。 The UK, and Cambridge university, provide evidence of this change. Since 1981, the number of journal articles produced by UK researchers has risen 150 per cent, to about 100,000 articles a year. But when you look at domestic papers, where all of the authors were in Britain, output is almost flat. According to the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database of 12,000 journals, since 2010 the majority of journal articles with a British-based author has had at least one co-author from another country. 英國(guó)和劍橋大學(xué)為這種改變提供了證據(jù)。1981年以來(lái)，英國(guó)研究人員發(fā)表的期刊論文數(shù)量增長(zhǎng)了150%，達(dá)到每年10萬(wàn)篇左右。不過(guò)，如果你考察的是英國(guó)本土論文（即論文的作者全都住在英國(guó)），那么發(fā)表數(shù)量幾乎沒有變化。根據(jù)收錄有1.2萬(wàn)份期刊的湯森路透科學(xué)網(wǎng)(Thomson Reuters Web of Science)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)，自2010年以來(lái)，英國(guó)作者發(fā)表的期刊論文絕大多數(shù)都至少有一位來(lái)自其他國(guó)家的共同作者。 This is not a solely UK phenomenon. Research shows the same trend in the US, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland. Academics may reside in one country, but they belong to a community that has no boundaries. Their output is international. This has particularly affected cutting-edge research teams. We can measure the importance of research by counting how many times articles are subsequently cited by other researchers. The average citation impact of UK research is well above the world average. However, an article produced by a mixture of UK-based and foreign researchers can expect to be cited more than half as many times again compared with a wholly UK research team. 并非只有英國(guó)存在這種現(xiàn)象。研究表明，美國(guó)、德國(guó)、法國(guó)、荷蘭和瑞士也出現(xiàn)了同樣的趨勢(shì)。學(xué)者們可能住在不同的國(guó)家，但他們卻屬于一個(gè)無(wú)國(guó)界的團(tuán)體。他們的論文是國(guó)際合作的成果。這對(duì)最前沿研究團(tuán)隊(duì)的影響尤為明顯。我們可以通過(guò)統(tǒng)計(jì)論文被引用的次數(shù)來(lái)衡量研究成果的重要性。英國(guó)論文的平均引用次數(shù)遠(yuǎn)高于世界平均水平。但不出意料的是，英國(guó)研究人員與外國(guó)研究人員合作發(fā)表的論文的平均引用次數(shù)，要比英國(guó)本土論文的平均引用次數(shù)多出一半以上。 A network of elite institutions is emerging beyond national boundaries that is almost independent of their hinterlands. Cambridge’s top international partners are all leaders themselves: the Max Planck Institute, Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Caltech, Berkeley, Toronto, Heidelberg and Tokyo. 一個(gè)由精英研究機(jī)構(gòu)組成的網(wǎng)絡(luò)正在超越國(guó)界的限制，它幾乎獨(dú)立于這些機(jī)構(gòu)的所在國(guó)存在。劍橋的國(guó)際合作伙伴們自身也都是一流研究機(jī)構(gòu)：馬克斯·普朗克研究所(Max Planck Institute)、哈佛大學(xué)(Harvard)、麻省理工學(xué)院(MIT)、加州理工學(xué)院(Caltech)、加州大學(xué)伯克利分校(Berkeley)、多倫多大學(xué)(University of Toronto)、海德堡大學(xué)(Heidelberg)和東京大學(xué)(The University of Tokyo)。 Indeed, more than half of Cambridge’s research is joint with global partners. Its output is already high-impact, but it gets a citation boost from collaborative work. In the UK, the disparity in impact between domestic and international research is growing. Universities with few international partners are behind. 實(shí)際上，劍橋大學(xué)一半以上的研究是與其國(guó)際伙伴合作完成的。劍橋發(fā)表的論文本已具有很大的影響力，國(guó)際合作論文進(jìn)一步推高了劍橋論文的引用次數(shù)。在英國(guó)，本土論文和國(guó)際合作論文的影響力差距越來(lái)越大。沒有國(guó)際合作伙伴的大學(xué)落在了后面。 Outside Europe and North America, however, the pattern is different. Since 1981, domestic research has at least trebled among the Bric nations. Growth was astronomic in China, where research by teams there has grown tenfold since 1997 and is now 30 per cent greater than the UK’s output. “Homegrown” research is also expanding rapidly in emerging research powers such as Brazil, India, South Korea and eastern Europe. 然而，在歐洲和北美以外地區(qū)，情況則有所不同。自1981年以來(lái)，金磚四國(guó)(BRIC)的本土論文數(shù)量至少增長(zhǎng)了兩倍。中國(guó)論文數(shù)量的增長(zhǎng)可謂“天文數(shù)字”——中國(guó)研究團(tuán)隊(duì)的論文數(shù)量自1997年以來(lái)增長(zhǎng)了9倍，目前的數(shù)字比英國(guó)高出30%。巴西、印度、韓國(guó)和東歐國(guó)家等新興論文大國(guó)的“本土”論文數(shù)量也在迅速增長(zhǎng)。 This transformation is creating a massive global research industry that is causing some big problems for national science policy makers in advanced economies. First, reading the published output of academics from these more closed academic communities will not give our researchers access to their culture, priority setting and problem solving. So the research superpowers must start expanding partnerships between their own institutions and leading ones in the emerging research nations. Stop worrying about brain drains: the west needs to start sending scientists to work in these countries. 這種轉(zhuǎn)變催生出一個(gè)龐大的全球研究產(chǎn)業(yè)，為發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體的國(guó)家科學(xué)政策制定者帶來(lái)了一些重大問題。首先，我們的研究人員無(wú)法通過(guò)閱讀這些較為封閉的學(xué)術(shù)團(tuán)體發(fā)表的論文，來(lái)了解他們的文化、優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)制定以及問題解決機(jī)制。因此，論文超級(jí)大國(guó)必須著手?jǐn)U大本國(guó)研究機(jī)構(gòu)與新興論文國(guó)家主要研究機(jī)構(gòu)的合作。別再擔(dān)心人才流失：西方有必要派出科學(xué)家到這些新興國(guó)家工作。 Furthermore, it will be tougher for governments in the west to capture future returns on investment in research. Future innovation and developments are increasingly likely to have owners in several countries. It will not be possible to generate, corral and contain the innovative knowledge within one country, so governments need to be training and retaining the people who know how to use these discoveries. 此外，西方國(guó)家的政府未來(lái)將更加難以從研發(fā)投資中收獲回報(bào)。未來(lái)的創(chuàng)新和開發(fā)越來(lái)越有可能歸多個(gè)國(guó)家的研究人員所有。單獨(dú)一個(gè)國(guó)家不可能創(chuàng)造、圈護(hù)和控制創(chuàng)新知識(shí)，因此，各國(guó)政府需要培養(yǎng)和留住那些懂得如何運(yùn)用這些發(fā)現(xiàn)的人才。 The primary reason for investing in the research base is to support great research. What they produce pays off in unpredictable ways, often with huge social and economic benefits. In the short term, a research base that spawned both Newton and Crick produces people who can drive innovation in business. But the challenge of weaving research into economic success is no longer just about getting the best brains into labs in your own country. 投資研究基地的主要原因是要為重大研究提供支持。研究成果的影響是不可預(yù)知的，往往會(huì)帶來(lái)巨大的社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)效益。短期而言，培養(yǎng)出牛頓和克里克二人的研究基地會(huì)培養(yǎng)出能夠推動(dòng)商業(yè)創(chuàng)新的人才。但要想把研究成果轉(zhuǎn)化為經(jīng)濟(jì)成果，面臨的挑戰(zhàn)將不再只是把秀的人才招攬至本國(guó)實(shí)驗(yàn)室。 The writer is director of research at Thomson Reuters IP and Science 本文作者是湯森路透知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)與科技(Thomson Reuters IP and Science)研究主管