Analysis of the “Non-equivalency” in International Scientific Cooperation: A Case-study of the Cooperation between Chinese Academy of Sciences and its British Partners

Abstract

: Though equivalent cooperation is often stressed in the process of international scientific cooperation, there also exists non-equivalency. Yet this is not much discussed and is needed in-depth analysis and case studies.This paper categorizes and analyzes the inputs of collaborative resources and the outputs of collaboration. In order to carry out international scientific cooperation, the participating parties must have resources that can be inputted into the cooperation, including intellectual resources, technological resources, research object resources, financial resources, and other implicit resources. In general, the more collaborative resources the collaborators possess, the stronger capacity they have to conduct the cooperative activities. However, there are also cases where the collaborators, though not having strong comprehensive scientific capacity, still can attract international scientists to cooperate with them by virtue of their unique or distinctive collaborative resources in some aspects. The outputs of collaboration can be divided into "explicit" and "implicit" ones. Explicit outputs refer to the tangible and quantifiable ones, such as jointly generated research data, co-authored papers or patents, jointly trained graduate students, establishment of collaborative research platforms, joint development or improvement of experimental or testing equipment, etc .; while implicit outputs are those difficult to quantify, but can support and promote the generation of explicit outputs, and those having long-term impact for the development of collaborative partnership, such as building up the international environment, enhancing international influence, forming sophisticated scientific management and operation mechanisms, and providing experience and paradigms for collaborators and international peers, etc . Taking the Royal Fellowship Programme and the collaboration between Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and the Royal Botanic Gardens as case-study objects, this paper analyzes the impact of resources and outputs of cooperation. In the case of the Royal Fellowship Programme which funded Chinese scientists to conduct research activities in the UK, the funder also gained implicit outputs, such as consolidating bilateral relations, expanding influence in China, and serving Sino-British diplomatic development, etc. This shows that one of the motives for non-equivalent cooperation derives from the emphasis on implicit outputs. The cooperation between CAS and the Royal Botanic Gardens proves that apart from such resources as intelligence, technology, funds and equipment, the unique or regional resources of the collaborators are also quite influential in international scientific cooperation. Even if the research capacities or conditions of one collaborator relatively lag behind, it is still attractive to international partners as long as it possesses exclusive or unique resources. Thus that the collaborators utilize different resources in cooperation is also an important reason for the non-equivalent cooperation. Basing on the above-mentioned analysis and case studies, the paper concludes that the causes of non-equivalency existing in international scientific cooperation are as follows: Firstly, the "value" of some collaborative resources cannot be quantified; Secondly, the collaborative outputs may be implicit; Thirdly, the scarcity and exclusivity of collaborative resources may lead to the non-equivalency. Meanwhile, it expounds the significance of understanding such non-equivalency, including enriching the theory of international scientific cooperation, deepening our understanding to the rationality and necessity of carrying out different forms of scientific cooperation in different historical backgrounds, and helping us to distinguish "effective internationalization" from "ineffective internationalization".