Title Trials

This reform builds upon changes initiated last year, with a significant focus on improving transparency and accountability.　

Among them is the introduction of third-party peer assessments for candidates. If an academician is found to have violated academic ethics or engaged in misconduct that tarnishes the reputation of the academic community, their titles can be revoked.　

The highest academic title for scientists, scholars and engineers in China, academicians are selected every two years. Currently, CAS has 873 Chinese and 154 academicians holding foreign nationality, while CAE has 978 Chinese and 124 overseas academicians.　

In late 2023, CAS and CAE selected 59 and 74 new academicians across their departments, or “divisions” based on research fields, which was below the planned numbers of 79 and 90. These gaps between planned seats and successful candidates are the largest since 2009.　

The new academicians come from disciplines such as space technology, geology, medical sciences, agriculture and petrochemicals.　

Mu Rongping, a researcher at the CAS Science and Technology Strategy Consulting Institute, attributed the reduced number to the tightened selection process, particularly arising from the third-party peer evaluations.　

Mu acknowledged that while the reform has introduced new problems, it is a continuous process. “In general, this round of reform is a major overhaul based on all previous efforts,” Mu said.　

Experts interviewed by NewsChina noted that the core objective of the reform is to maintain academic standards and ensure that those selected as academicians are truly pushing the boundaries of their fields.

An anonymous academician told NewsChina that reducing the number of recommended candidates is an effective way to prevent nepotism and private dealings.　

“When someone has only one precious vote, they are forced to think more carefully about their choice,” Mu said. “This ensures that only the most qualified candidates are shortlisted.”　

In addition, candidates under 65 now require only one recommendation, while those over 65 need two. The system favors candidates under 65 to maintain the vitality of the academician community. Generally, the older the candidates are beyond 65, the more difficult and stringent the selection process becomes.　

After nominations, the process moves to the crucial stage of voting and selection. The most significant reform is the introduction of an external peer evaluation mechanism. This change opens the process to the wider academic community, moving beyond the traditional model of existing academicians selecting new ones.　

However, the detailed voting mechanism and procedures for third-party peer evaluations have not yet been finalized or made public.　

During the preliminary selection process, external peer experts are chosen from a pool of overseas Chinese scholars or those within China who have achieved major academic honors, such as the coveted Changjiang Scholar or Distinguished Young Scholar prizes.　

Awarded by China’s Ministry of Education, these honors recognize scholars who have made significant contributions in the fields of science, technology or the humanities. The Changjiang Scholar title comes with a prize of up to 2 million yuan (US$281,000) and an annual stipend of 100,000 yuan (US$14,000), while the Distinguished Young Scholar award ranges from 2 to 4 million yuan (US$562,000).　

There are six divisions in CAS, each responsible for managing different areas of research, including mathematics and physics, chemistry, life and medical sciences, Earth sciences, IT sciences and technological sciences.　

Each division organizes selection panels of experts that can number in the dozens. To ensure impartiality, the evaluation process for new academicians is conducted under strict closed-loop management, where participants work in isolation, with meals delivered to them to maintain focus.　

Li Xia, a professor at Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Institute of Science History and Science Culture, told NewsChina that involving external experts not only broadens the scope of evaluation and improves objectivity, but also makes corruption increasingly difficult.　

Mu Rongping added that it is important for peers to express their opinions independently, which was sometimes challenging during previous selections.　

Some voiced concerns about the reformed evaluation process, arguing that discussions and exchanges of opinions are necessary. “The value of some research findings requires discussion for clarity,” said the anonymous academician. “If discussions are limited, it could affect the accuracy of the selection in terms of scientific judgement to some extent.”

For example, the Division of Life Sciences and Medicine at CAS allocated places for basic biology, medicine, agriculture, and emerging infectious diseases and biosafety.　

Each division also listed an emerging interdisciplinary field, with special quotas for each, including AI and bio-information. Several academicians noted that the reform aims to better support emerging interdisciplinary fields.　

Mu Rongping pointed out that traditional disciplines have long dominated academician ranks, making it difficult for scholars in emerging fields to break through. He stressed that these areas urgently need representatives. “These talents play an irreplaceable role in promoting national science and technology and participating in macro-strategic decision-making,” Mu said.　

A second anonymous academician remarked that previous efforts to balance disciplines have now been made more explicit through this reform, benefiting emerging fields that need growth but have relatively few academicians.

During the 2014 reform, a withdrawal mechanism was introduced, stating that an academician who engages in serious misconduct or violates scientific ethics could lose their title.　

“But to be honest, this regulation was more of a warning [than an effective deterrent],” Li Xia said, adding that only a handful of academicians have lost their titles over the years.　

The 2023 reform emphasized the importance of “banning nepotism and under-the-table dealings,” clarifying that if such activities are proven, the candidate would be permanently disqualified, and current academicians could lose their titles.　

Mu Rongping highlighted that improving the withdrawal mechanism is crucial to the system’s reform.　

Foreign academies and scientific societies often operate differently. In countries like the US, UK, Japan and Germany, academicians are members of scientific societies and hold honorary titles without the financial or administrative benefits associated with the role in China.　

In some cases, as Li Zhimin, vice president of the China Education Development Strategy Society, noted in a 2015 article, academicians in the US even pay membership fees rather than receiving special allowances or perks.　

Wang Yangzong, a professor at the University of CAS’s School of Humanities, wrote in a 2015 article that the power once held exclusively by division members has transformed into an implicit power among all academicians. Combined with the importance the central and local governments attach to the title, the power of academicians is constantly growing.　

“This implicit power lacks clear rules and is hard to restrain, which seriously deviates from the academician title’s original purpose,” Wang wrote in his article “From Division Members to Academician System.” .　

The second anonymous academician told NewsChina that since the introduction of external peer evaluations, there has been an increase in academic conferences and events, particularly among younger scholars aiming to boost their profiles. “External peer experts are typically well-known in the academic community. I suspect some candidates are organizing unnecessary conferences to increase their visibility among these experts,” the insider said.　

In his view, the ultimate goal of reforming the academician system is not only to change the system itself but also to improve the scientific research and academic environment, which will take time. “But as the older generation of academicians retire and new ones join, I believe the academic ecosystem will gradually improve,” the insider said.