The co-production of normal science: A social history of high-temperature superconductivity research in China (1987-2008).

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1177/03063127221119215
Chao Gu
{"title":"The co-production of normal science: A social history of high-temperature superconductivity research in China (1987-2008).","authors":"Chao Gu","doi":"10.1177/03063127221119215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The discovery of high-temperature superconductivity (HTS) was a momentous event. This article explores the social and institutional history of HTS research in China between 1987 and 2008. Desire for a Nobel Prize shaped the Chinese state's initial push to establish the National Superconductivity Research Program. Yet, after the enthusiasm for HTS research cooled, and even after a Nobel Prize for HTS was awarded to non-Chinese scientists, financial and institutional support for the research continued. This process fostered the 'to live' ethos of science, which has replaced the Nobel Prize dream as a central mechanism of interaction between the state and science in China. Indeed, Chinese HTS research not only survived, but also produced an abundance of 'normal science' discoveries. This pattern continued after 2008, when Japanese scientists made the groundbreaking innovation of iron-based superconductivity and Chinese scientists quickly turned their attention to this sub-field. They published many papers pushing the field forward slightly, rather than making the largest scientific advances. The mutual interaction between the state and scientists underpinned this phenomenon: On the one hand, the productivity of normal science has helped to maintain state legitimacy. On the other hand, the evaluation and incentive systems, as well as deep-rooted cultural features such as officialism, utilitarianism, and the foregrounding of politics lead scientists to opportunistically pursue normal science. The state and scientists have co-produced a regime of normal science.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"53 1","pages":"81-101"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221119215","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The discovery of high-temperature superconductivity (HTS) was a momentous event. This article explores the social and institutional history of HTS research in China between 1987 and 2008. Desire for a Nobel Prize shaped the Chinese state's initial push to establish the National Superconductivity Research Program. Yet, after the enthusiasm for HTS research cooled, and even after a Nobel Prize for HTS was awarded to non-Chinese scientists, financial and institutional support for the research continued. This process fostered the 'to live' ethos of science, which has replaced the Nobel Prize dream as a central mechanism of interaction between the state and science in China. Indeed, Chinese HTS research not only survived, but also produced an abundance of 'normal science' discoveries. This pattern continued after 2008, when Japanese scientists made the groundbreaking innovation of iron-based superconductivity and Chinese scientists quickly turned their attention to this sub-field. They published many papers pushing the field forward slightly, rather than making the largest scientific advances. The mutual interaction between the state and scientists underpinned this phenomenon: On the one hand, the productivity of normal science has helped to maintain state legitimacy. On the other hand, the evaluation and incentive systems, as well as deep-rooted cultural features such as officialism, utilitarianism, and the foregrounding of politics lead scientists to opportunistically pursue normal science. The state and scientists have co-produced a regime of normal science.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
常态科学的协同生产:中国高温超导研究的社会史(1987-2008)。
高温超导(HTS)的发现是一个重大事件。本文探讨了1987年至2008年间中国高消费研究的社会史和制度史。对诺贝尔奖的渴望促使中国政府最初推动建立国家超导研究计划。然而,在对高温超导研究的热情冷却之后,甚至在诺贝尔高温超导奖被授予非华裔科学家之后,对这项研究的财政和机构支持仍在继续。这一过程培养了“活着”的科学精神,取代了诺贝尔奖梦想,成为中国国家与科学互动的核心机制。事实上,中国的高温超导研究不仅存活了下来,而且产生了大量的“正常科学”发现。2008年之后,日本科学家取得了铁基超导的突破性创新,中国科学家迅速将注意力转向了这一子领域。他们发表了许多论文,只是略微推动了这一领域的发展,而没有取得最大的科学进展。国家和科学家之间的相互作用支撑了这一现象:一方面,常规科学的生产力有助于维持国家的合法性。另一方面,评价和激励制度以及官僚主义、功利主义、政治前景等根深蒂固的文化特征,导致科学家投机主义地追求常规科学。国家和科学家共同建立了一个正常的科学制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Wake effects and temperature plumes: Coping with non-knowledge in the expansion of wind and geothermal energy. Population curation: The construction of mutual obligation between individual and state in Danish precision medicine. Hearts and minds: The technopolitical role of affect in sociotechnical imaginaries. Cells and the city: The rise and fall of urban biopolitics in San Francisco, 1970-2020. What work does ‘contamination’ do? An agential realist account of oil wastewater and radium in groundwater
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1